The duty of care of the driver of the entry road according to the traffic priority in the intersection where traffic is not controlled;

All vehicles intending to enter an intersection in which traffic is not controlled under Article 22(4) and (6) of the Road Traffic Act, shall slow down when the width of the intersection is wider than that of the road on which the said vehicle is passing, and when there are other vehicles intending to enter the intersection from a wider road, they shall yield the course to the said vehicle. In light of the fact that the traffic is not controlled, the driver of a vehicle having the priority of traffic by driving a wide road along the intersection where the traffic is not controlled and driving a vehicle with a narrow road, which is located in the priority of traffic, reliances on the withdrawal of appropriate actions in accordance with traffic regulations. Therefore, as a driver who has already entered the intersection through a wide road, barring any special circumstance, the driver is obliged to pay due care to expect and prepare for the vehicle to be driven by him by entering the intersection at a speed lower than that of the road on which the vehicle is passing.

Article 750 of the Civil Code, Article 22 of the Road Traffic Act

Supreme Court Decision 77Do409 delivered on March 8, 197 (Gong1977, 9977), Supreme Court Decision 92Do934 delivered on August 18, 1992 (Gong1992, 2792), Supreme Court Decision 93Da1466 delivered on November 26, 1993 (Gong194, 193), Supreme Court Decision 95Da11832 delivered on July 11, 1995 (Gong195Ha, 2760)

Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. (Attorney Kim Jong-soo, Counsel for defendant-appellee)

Kim Jong-Un and one other (Attorney Kim Byung-ho, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Daegu District Court Decision 96Na4959 delivered on September 24, 1997

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

All vehicles intending to enter an intersection where traffic is not controlled under Article 22(4) and (6) of the Road Traffic Act shall slowly drive when the width of the intersection is wider than that of the road where the said vehicle passes, and when there are other vehicles intending to enter the said intersection from a wide road, the vehicle driver having the priority of traffic by driving the vehicle along the wide road along the intersection where traffic is not controlled shall have the right of way to the said vehicle. In light of the fact that Article 22(4) and (6) of the Road Traffic Act provides that a vehicle with the priority of traffic by driving the vehicle along the narrow road where the traffic is not controlled shall be deemed to drive the vehicle in trust in withdrawal of appropriate actions in accordance with traffic regulations. Thus, a driver who has already entered the intersection through a wide road shall not have the duty of care to expect and prepare for the vehicle by entering the intersection at a speed lower than that of his/her own speed without any special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Do489, Mar. 17, 1978).

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the non-party Kim Jong-Un was found to have been unable to enter the above 3rd line at a speed of about 50km due to the fact that the non-party Kim Jong-Un was to enter the above 5th line of time on September 20, 1995, and the non-party Kim Jong-Un was to have an access to the above 3rd line of time on the right-hand side of the above 5th line of time and to have an access to the above 4th line of time on the right-hand side of the above 5th line of time. The court below determined that the non-party Kim Jong-Un was to have an access to the above 3rd line of time on the right-hand side of the above 5th line of time and to have an access to the above 5th line of time on the right-hand side of the above 5th line of time, and that the non-party Kim Jong-Un was to have an access to the above 4th line of time on the road.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of 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 Lee Yong-hun (Presiding Justice)