208Do1899 Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents

OS (NOTRNES DOTRTUTRS), LITOTR

Seoul Residential M

Seoul basic domicile

Prosecutor

Seoul Western District Court Decision 2007No1623 Decided February 14, 2008

May 15, 2008

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 27 (1) of the Road Traffic Act provides that "when a pedestrian passes a crosswalk, it shall not mean all cases where the person is in a crosswalk, but it shall be limited to cases where a pedestrian passes the crosswalk as an intention to cross the road (see Supreme Court Decision 93Do118 delivered on August 13, 1993).

The court below determined that the accident of this case does not constitute a violation of the duty of pedestrian protection under Article 3 (2) 6 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, on the ground that the victim cannot be deemed to have passed the crosswalk with the intent to cross the road, and therefore, the victim cannot be deemed to have been obliged to protect pedestrians in relation to the victim. In light of the above legal principles, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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

Justices Kim Young-ran

Justices Kim Jae-sik

Justices Lee Hong-hoon