"Tailgating Vehicles Cause Intersection Gridlock" Not Guilty Despite Accident at Red Light [Seocho-dong Legal Story]

The photo is unrelated to the article content. / Photo by Hyunmin Kim kimhyun81@

Around 4 p.m. on August 16, 2020. On a one-way 4-lane road in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Mr. A (58, male) stopped his car before the stop line in the first lane and waited for the left turn signal. However, even after the signal turned green, he could not turn the steering wheel. This was because he could not cross the stop line due to the "tailgating" of oncoming straight-going vehicles.

Mr. A succeeded in crossing the stop line on the second left turn signal. The road was still completely blocked by the tailgating vehicles going straight. He moved his car forward, but before reaching the no-stopping zone marking (a white square with diagonal stripes), the signal turned red again.

The third left turn signal came on. This time, he entered inside the no-stopping zone. However, he still could not break the tailgating queue, and the red light came on again. At this moment, a gap appeared between the congested tailgating vehicles. Mr. A moved his car to squeeze through that gap.

"Bang!" An accident occurred during this process. The front right bumper of Mr. A's vehicle collided with the front part of Mr. B's (47, male) vehicle, which was going straight from the opposite direction. Mr. B sustained injuries requiring about two weeks of treatment. Mr. A was prosecuted for violating the Special Act on Traffic Accident Handling (injury).

The first trial court acquitted him, stating, "The defendant cannot be said to have caused the traffic accident by violating the signal." The first trial court explained, "The defendant, who had already entered the intersection by crossing the stop line according to the left turn signal, should have quickly exited the intersection following the yellow light that lit after the left turn signal. However, due to tailgating vehicles in the opposite lane, he could not exit the intersection," and "He caused the accident while trying to exit the intersection through a gap that appeared between the congested vehicles."

The prosecutor appealed the first trial's decision. The argument was that when the red light came on, the defendant should have stopped not only before the stop line but also at a position close to the intersection, just before the no-stopping zone.

However, the second trial court also found Mr. A not guilty. According to the court on the 11th, the Criminal Division 5-3 of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judge Jeong Deok-su) recently dismissed the prosecutor's appeal, stating, "It cannot be considered that the defendant violated the stop signal ahead."

The appellate court stated, "It is difficult to impose an obligation to stop or to reverse to the stop line on a vehicle that has already entered the intersection," and "interpreting the law as the prosecutor claims would be an expansion or analogical interpretation of the penal law provisions to the defendant's disadvantage, which cannot be accepted."