Where the other party's vehicle conflicts with a bus driving beyond the central line, a example recognizing the negligence of the bus driver;

In general, in cases where a motor vehicle driver overlaps with another motor vehicle coming from the opposite direction, the other motor vehicle has the trust of operating the motor vehicle in compliance with its normal method. However, in special cases where it is possible to expect the other motor vehicle to operate the motor vehicle in an abnormal manner, the above trust cannot be made, and the other motor vehicle driver is obliged to take all measures to prevent accidents by putting the other motor vehicle in a prudent manner into consideration the operation of the motor vehicle in an abnormal manner.

Article 750 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 71Da2642 delivered on February 22, 1972, 73Da280 delivered on June 12, 1973, 74Do2314 delivered on January 13, 1976

Maximum studio et al.

Attorney Kim Sung-sung et al., Counsel for the defendant

Daegu High Court Decision 81Na394 delivered on June 19, 1981

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the Defendant’s attorney are examined (including the supplementary statement in the grounds of appeal).

In a case where the driver of a motor vehicle overlaps with another motor vehicle coming from the opposite direction, the other motor vehicle has a trust of operating the motor vehicle in a normal way. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the other motor vehicle in advance goes beyond its central line and does not have an obligation to drive the motor vehicle even before its own bus, and the other motor vehicle does not have an obligation to drive the motor vehicle in its own way. The court below's decision that the other motor vehicle is no longer than 10 meters in front of its own bus without any error in law as it was found that the other motor vehicle was no longer than 20 meters in front of its own bus due to the lack of any error in law since it was found that the other motor vehicle was no more than 20 meters in front of its own bus at the time of its collision. The court below's decision that the other motor vehicle driver was no more than 20 meters in front of its own bus at the time of its collision with the other motor vehicle in front of its own bus at the time of its collision is no more than 30 meters in front of it.

In addition, the remaining grounds of appeal purport that the court below erred in the misapprehension of the evidence collection and fact-finding of the court below or the court below erred in the comparison of negligence, and such grounds of appeal do not constitute a case under Article 11 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Jong-young (Presiding Justice)