Article 3 (2) (proviso) (2) of the former Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (amended by Act No. 3744, Aug. 4, 1984) means "when the center line of a road is invaded".

Article 3(2) proviso of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (amended by Act No. 3744, Aug. 4, 1984) refers to the intentional deprivation of the central line to drive a vehicle, and it does not include cases where the central line has been invaded to avoid an obstacle, or where the place of accident is the point beyond the central line to avoid an obstacle.

Article 3(2)2 of the former Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (amended by Act No. 3744, Aug. 4, 1984)

Supreme Court Decision 84Do193 delivered on March 27, 1984; 84Do2134 delivered on November 27, 1984

Defendant

Prosecutor

Jeju District Court Decision 84No181 delivered on October 19, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

When the driver intentionally intrudes the center line of the road where the lane is installed in violation of the provisions of Article 11-2 (2) of the Road Traffic Act in the former part of Article 11-2 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, which is an exception to the special cases concerning punishment which cannot be prosecuted against the express intent of the victim under Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. It is reasonable to conclude that it does not include all cases where the center line has been invaded in order to avoid an obstacle, or where it is inevitable to avoid an obstacle, it does not include all cases where the center line is a point beyond the center line.

According to the court below's decision, the defendant's operation of 6.5 tons dump truck and loaded aggregate at the fish bed and the new bed at a point 20 meters away from the right line at the speed of 30 kilometers a speed of the Do government school located in the Dobdong at the same time and tried to turn to the left at a point 20 meters away from the right line at the right line at the speed of Do government school located in the same city, and discovered that one child's name is crossing the road at the center of the Do government school at the center of the city at the time when he tried to turn to the left, and in order to avoid this child, he dump truck dump truck coming to the right line before the left line, the fact finding of the court below is justified, and there is no reason to conclude that this case's case's case's appeal cannot be included in the first part of this case's case's case's appeal for violation of the Act's 3rd Special Measures.

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

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)