In the event that an expressway is driven by a motor vehicle, the principle of trust that the pedestrian will not be able to stand on the center side of the main line of the road shall be excluded under special circumstances.

In the event that an expressway is driven by a motor vehicle, the principle of trust that the pedestrian will not be able to stand on the center side of the main line of the road shall be excluded under special circumstances.

Article 268 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul Criminal District Court Decision 70No3627 delivered on June 12, 1971, the Seoul Criminal District Court Decision 70No3627 delivered on June 12, 1971

The original judgment shall be reversed, and

The case shall be remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Criminal Court.

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

The facts established by the original judgment are that the defendant, at the speed of 80 km a speed of the vehicle driving on the expressway, had a distance between the vehicle and the 80-meter long from the vehicle in front of the newspaper company belonging to the former in the central separation zone where he had engaged in the construction of the road (first line) repair work, and the victim who had engaged in labor, was laid down in the center of the second line (on the main line) in order to put the vehicle into the engine, and the distance between the victim and the victim when the defendant was making a sudden stop is about 23 meters, and the distance between the victim when the defendant was making a sudden stop is about 18 meters. However, in relation to the above facts, the original judgment determined that the accident at issue occurred due to force majeure by the reason of the original opinion, and that the defendant refused to drive the vehicle.

In light of the above, the driver who operates an expressway with the speed of 80 km on the expressway (in this case, the speed of 80 km on the expressway) shall be deemed to be driving under the trust that the pedestrian would not have up to the center of the main line of the road, and the same applies to the time when the repair workers work on the road would pass by the main line of the road, and the office of the expressway may at least give up the necessity and value of the high speed transportation agency to its employees, and it is anticipated that at least it would have seriously known the purport of dangerous work to its employees, and that it would have been employed by the operator of trust that there would have been no crying on the main line such as general pedestrians, and therefore, it is difficult to see that the defendant would have had a duty to be forgotten at the speed of 8 driver of the road, which would have been applied to this case, and thus, it would be difficult to see that there would have been any justifiable reason to exclude the driver of the vehicle from the duty to be forgotten by the driver of the vehicle at the speed of the vehicle.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

The judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) of the Red Marins (Presiding Judge) of the Republic of Korea