Violations of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents: Punishment and Exceptions

Based on 124 consultation cases · Updated October 4, 2026 · Translated from the Korean original.

If a person is injured in a traffic accident, the offender cannot always avoid criminal punishment merely because the victim does not wish to press charges or the offender has insurance. Whether an exception applies—such as a signal violation or crossing the center line—and whether the driver breached the duty to take rescue measures after the accident are determined by examining the specific circumstances, including how the accident occurred and the extent of the victim’s injuries.

People involved → Driver → Injured person → Prosecutor → A person is injured in a traffic accident → Did the driver leave without necessary rescue measures? → Yes — Article 5-3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes → Criminal responsibility may still be possible → No → Does a statutory traffic exception apply? → Yes — Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents → Does the victim expressly oppose prosecution? → Yes → Prosecution is generally barred under the victim-opposition rule → Check the exact traffic circumstances → Was there a listed exception such as a signal or center-line violation? → Check the rescue response → Did the driver know of the injury and take necessary rescue measures? → Check injury and treatment → How serious was the injury and was treatment needed? A later settlement does not erase leaving wit…

Key points

As a general rule, a person who commits bodily injury by occupational or gross negligence in a traffic accident may not be prosecuted against the victim’s express wishes. However, the person may be punished if a statutory exception applies (Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 3(2) (교통사고처리특례법 제3조 제2항); Cases 13 and 21).
The exceptions described in the cases include signal violations, crossing the center line, exceeding the speed limit by more than 20 km/h, violating rules on overtaking or crossing railroad tracks, breaching the duty to protect pedestrians at a crosswalk, driving without a license or while intoxicated, driving onto a sidewalk, breaching the duty to prevent passengers from falling, and accidents in child protection zones (Cases 13 and 21).
Even if a driver crosses the center line, the exception for crossing the center line may not apply if the driver had no time to take appropriate measures to avoid an obstacle or the crossing was unavoidable because of external circumstances beyond the driver’s control. Conversely, an accident that occurs while returning to the original lane after crossing the center line may still be an accident involving a center-line crossing (Cases 2 and 24).
A right turn on a red signal must be assessed according to the circumstances. If the pedestrian signal at a crosswalk adjoining the intersection is green, the driver must stop at the stop line and may not turn right. However, even if the driver turns right on red while obstructing other traffic, that act alone may not constitute the signal-violation exception (Cases 8 and 23).
A white solid line immediately before an intersection does not, by itself, constitute a safety marking prohibiting a change of lane within the intersection. If there is no separate sign prohibiting lane changes within the intersection, an accident involving a lane change does not automatically amount to a violation of a signal or instruction under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Case 16).
Whether a driver fled after an accident is determined by considering whether the driver knew that the victim was injured, whether the driver took the necessary rescue measures, and whether the driver left the victim in a situation where the person who caused the accident could not be identified. Even if the driver later settles with the victim, that does not eliminate responsibility for leaving the scene immediately after the accident without taking rescue measures (Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 5-3 (특정범죄가중처벌 등에 관한 법률 제5조의3); Cases 4, 7, and 14).
The crime of hit-and-run driving may not be established if the injury is extremely minor, treatment is unnecessary, and the victim’s health cannot be said to have been impaired. However, the need for rescue measures cannot be ruled out merely because no external injury was visible or the victim went about their daily activities immediately after the accident (Cases 11, 12, and 25).
The application of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the hit-and-run vehicle offense may not depend solely on whether the accident occurred on a road as defined by the Road Traffic Act. The cited case explains that the hit-and-run vehicle provisions may apply even to an accident in a church parking lot (Case 18).

Frequently asked questions

Q. Can I avoid punishment by settling with the victim or having comprehensive insurance?

As a general rule, if the victim has not died and does not wish the offender to be punished, a prosecution may not be brought. Having insurance or mutual-aid coverage is also relevant to the statutory exception. However, a settlement or insurance coverage alone cannot prevent punishment if a statutory exception applies or, for example, the driver fled without taking rescue measures after the accident.

Case 13, Case 21

Q. Is a driver always punished if an accident occurs after crossing the center line?

The mere fact that a vehicle crossed the center line does not automatically make the accident an exception for center-line crossing. If the driver had no opportunity to avoid an obstacle, or crossed the line unavoidably because of external circumstances, the exception may not apply. However, a driver may be subject to punishment if an accident occurs while returning to the original lane after crossing the center line.

Case 2, Case 24

Q. If an accident occurs while turning right on red at an intersection, is that a signal violation?

In some circumstances, a driver may turn right on a red light without obstructing other traffic; an accident does not necessarily mean that the driver violated the signal. However, if the pedestrian signal at a crosswalk adjoining the intersection is green, the driver must stop at the stop line and may not turn right. An accident caused by disregarding this rule may be found to involve a signal violation.

Case 8, Case 23

Q. If I hit someone crossing at a crosswalk while the pedestrian signal is red, is it still a crosswalk accident?

The cited case explains that when a pedestrian crosses against the pedestrian signal, the driver may have breached a separate duty to take care to prevent an accident, but that this does not necessarily constitute a breach of the duty to protect pedestrians on a crosswalk. Accordingly, the exception does not automatically apply merely because the accident occurred on a crosswalk.

Case 17

Q. Does everyone who leaves the scene immediately after an accident commit hit-and-run driving?

Leaving the scene, by itself, does not constitute the crime of hit-and-run driving. The determination is made by considering all the circumstances, including whether the driver knew the victim was injured, whether rescue measures were necessary, and whether the driver left the victim in a situation where it was difficult to identify the person who caused the accident.

Case 4, Case 11, Case 14

Q. Can hit-and-run driving be established even if the victim suffered only a minor injury?

The crime of hit-and-run driving may not be established if the injury is so minor that treatment is unnecessary and it is difficult to find that the victim’s health was impaired. Conversely, even if an injury appears minor, the crime may be established if the victim actually received treatment and the need for rescue measures at the time of the accident cannot readily be ruled out.

Case 12, Case 25

Q. If the victim said they were all right or had no visible injuries, was it unnecessary to take rescue measures?

That cannot be concluded categorically. In particular, a child or another victim who may have difficulty fully assessing their own injuries may need a medical examination and treatment. Whether rescue measures were necessary is determined by considering the circumstances of the accident, the location and severity of the injury, and what happened afterward.

Case 6, Case 11, Case 25

Q. Do the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents or the hit-and-run vehicle offense apply to accidents in a church or apartment parking lot?

The cited case explains that an accident covered by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the offense of hit-and-run driving are not necessarily limited to accidents occurring on a road as defined by the Road Traffic Act. Whether a road within an apartment complex qualifies as a road under the Road Traffic Act may depend on the specific circumstances, including whether it is open to use by an unspecified number of people.

Case 6, Case 18

Relevant laws

Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 3(1) (교통사고처리특례법 제3조 제1항)
Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 3(2) (교통사고처리특례법 제3조 제2항)
Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 4 (교통사고처리특례법 제4조)
Road Traffic Act, Article 13(3) (도로교통법 제13조 제3항)
Road Traffic Act, Article 27(1) (도로교통법 제27조 제1항)
Road Traffic Act, Article 54(1) (도로교통법 제54조 제1항)
Enforcement Rules of the Road Traffic Act, Article 6(2) [Appendix 2] (도로교통법 시행규칙 제6조 제2항 [별표 2])
Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 5-3 (특정범죄가중처벌 등에 관한 법률 제5조의3)
Criminal Act, Article 268 (형법 제268조)

Watch out for

Whether an exception applies depends on factors such as the accident location, signal status, the circumstances of the driving, and the direct cause of the accident, so it is difficult to decide based on the outcome alone.
Even if the offender has settled with the victim or has insurance, the offender may still be punished if the accident involved a death, a statutory exception, or fleeing without taking rescue measures.
Do not assume that rescue measures are unnecessary merely because the victim says they are all right or has no visible injuries.

Source cases

This guide was compiled by AI from the following Korea Legal Aid Corporation consultation cases (in Korean).

This guide is general legal information about Korean law, not legal advice for your situation. For a specific case, consult a lawyer or the Korea Legal Aid Corporation (call 132 in Korea).