logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2015.05.15 2015고단233
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. On October 25, 2014, the Defendant, who is engaged in driving Crocketing taxi, was running three-lane roads in front of the E-cafeteria located in Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, in accordance with two-lanes from the boundary line to the 60km from the boundary line of the Cheongju-si.

On the other hand, there is a crosswalk where signal lights are installed, so there was a duty of care to check whether a person engaged in driving service is a person who actually sees the front line and the right and the right and the right and the right, operates the steering direction and the system accurately, and safely proceed.

Nevertheless, due to the negligence of neglecting this, the Defendant was negligent in driving ahead of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the part of the victim F(47 years of age) who cross the above crosswalk from the left side of the running direction to the right side of the Defendant’s road.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as the fever, which is the 100s on the right side, for about eight weeks of treatment due to such occupational negligence.

2. In light of the legislative intent of the provisions of the Act on the Obligation to Protect Pedestrians, all pedestrians passing along the crosswalk while the green light, such as pedestrian signal, etc., starts with on-and-off warning prior to the flickering signal, are subject to the duty to protect pedestrians in the crosswalk (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do9598, May 13, 2009). In a case where the traffic of pedestrians is prohibited due to a red light, it shall be deemed that pedestrians who lose the character of the crosswalk, and thus, they cannot be deemed as pedestrians subject to the duty to protect pedestrians.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 97Do1835 delivered on October 10, 1997, 2001Do2939 delivered on October 9, 2001, and 86Do549 delivered on May 27, 1986, etc.) However, according to the records of this case, the accident of this case is a crosswalk on the green light of the pedestrian signal, etc.

arrow