The case holding that the truck driver was not negligent in the operation of the truck, where the driver of the vehicle stops on the right side of the road with an emergency flashing, etc. and the driver of the vehicle is shocked.

In order for Party A, who is a car driving driver, to use the above truck to stop on the right side of the road and stop the above car to check the exact arrival at the point of accident, in order to confirm the arrival of the above truck from the point of accident, Party A, who stops on the right side of the road without stopping the above car truck, and after stopping it on the right side of the road, Party A sent the above truck by using the hand gate, etc. with which Party A was stopped at a point of two meters later, and Party A sent a signal to avoid the above truck, but Party A did not neglect to pay due attention to the operation of the above car in case of an accident, because Party A neglected to stop the above truck at the front time.

Article 750 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Lee Gyeong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff 1 and two others, Plaintiffs et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellee and two others

Daesung Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 92Na68075 delivered on May 26, 1993

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs' grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged the fact that the accident of this case occurred by Nonparty 1, who was a car driver of the defendant-owned car, was negligent in driving the above car on the right side of the road without stopping the above car, and stopping it on the right side of the road in order to confirm the exact arrival of arrival for Nonparty 2, who was following the driver of the above truck when driving the above truck at the point of accident, without stopping the above truck at the time of accident, and then stopping the above car on the right side of the road. The above non-party 1 was negligent in failing to pay attention to the deceased as to the operation of the above car of this case.

In light of the records, the above recognition judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to wrongful facts or negligence in violation of the rules of evidence without making a proper deliberation as to the theory of lawsuit in the court below.

We cannot accept the issue because it is merely merely criticizes the determination of evidence and the recognition of facts belonging to the exclusive jurisdiction of the court below.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Yong-sik (Presiding Justice)