"I Used My Turn Signal"... What Punishment for Driver Who Caused Accident by Abruptly Changing from 5th to 2nd Lane?

Denied Responsibility, Claiming "Turn Signal Was On"
Sentenced to 1 Year and 6 Months in Prison, Suspended for 3 Years

A man in his 70s who caused a non-contact traffic accident by abruptly changing lanes on a highway and fled the scene without taking any action has received a suspended prison sentence on appeal, following a similar sentence in the first trial.

On May 18, Yonhap News reported that the Criminal Division 1 of the Chuncheon District Court (Presiding Judge Shim Hyungeun) dismissed the appeal filed by Mr. A (age 72), who was indicted on charges of causing injury while fleeing under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes and for failing to take action after an accident under the Road Traffic Act. The court upheld the original sentence of one year and six months in prison, suspended for three years.

View of the Gyeongbu Expressway in Seoul. Photo by Kang Jinhyung

On February 18, Mr. A was driving a Ray passenger car in the fifth lane of the Capital Region First Ring Expressway in Nongok-dong, Siheung, Gyeonggi Province, when he suddenly changed lanes to the second lane. As a result, Mr. A was brought to trial on charges of causing an accident between Mr. B's passenger car, which was traveling in the second lane, and Mr. C's van, which was in the first lane.

According to the investigation, Mr. B swerved into the first lane to avoid Mr. A's vehicle, which was changing lanes abruptly, and collided with Mr. C's van. As a result of the accident, Mr. B and a 24-month-old child were injured, and their severely damaged, overturned vehicle had to be scrapped. In addition, Mr. C and other passengers in the van sustained injuries requiring two weeks of medical treatment.

In court on hit-and-run charges, Mr. A claimed, "I changed lanes with my turn signal on" and insisted he was not at fault. However, both the first trial and the appellate court rejected this argument and found him guilty.

The appellate court stated, "Changing lanes recklessly without fully considering the traffic situation constitutes a violation of the duty of care, which prohibits changing lanes if it interferes with the normal driving of other vehicles." The court further explained, "Simply using the turn signal does not mean the duty of care was fulfilled." The court also noted that the impact sound of Mr. B's car overturning was so loud that it was recorded on Mr. A's dashcam, and concluded that Mr. A could have fully recognized at the time that an accident had occurred behind him as Mr. B tried to avoid a collision with his vehicle.