logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.10.27 2016노186
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The accident of this case, which is a summary of the grounds for appeal, falls under the median accident as defined in Article 3(2)2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

2. Determination:

A. Whether the Defendant violated the central line or not, according to the safety signs that allow the U.S. full time, the Defendant was holding a U.S. line in excess of the white domin line in the U.S. permissible zone.

Although the center line, which the Road Traffic Act stipulates on the road crossing part of the defendant, is not maintained, considering the following circumstances, it should be considered that the white line in the U.S. permissible internship area has the meaning of the center line.

Therefore, it is unreasonable for the court below to conclude that the permissible display line of the white dominton in this case cannot be seen as the central line under Article 2 subparagraph 5 of the Road Traffic Act.

(1) There is a median line which has been kept in yellow solid lines before and after the above white lines of about three meters crossing by the defendant.

(2) In a crosswalk in which the median line is not maintained, there are cases in which the median line is recognized.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 200Do5848 Decided February 9, 2001, and 201Do12093 Decided February 9, 201). (3) If the central line is deemed to have no meaning on the above white line, if the above white line exceeds the above white line on the opposite lane and the accident occurred, it would result in so far as it cannot be applied to the median line under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the vehicle line installed in the center of the road marked with the lane as a road, not a one-way road (a white line, etc., which is the display line of the zone permitted for the internship in this case) concurrently serves as the center line.

B. The accident of this case is caused by the act of driving a traffic accident by breaking the center line in accordance with the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (hereinafter “Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents”) under Article 3(2)2.

arrow