| Summary: | 碩士 === 逢甲大學 === 交通工程與管理所 === 96 === The process of dealing with roadway accident is complex and variable. The laws and decrees of operation procedure obey constitution and fundamental legislation about government, but traffic laws follow national administrative laws in order to be implemented. Therefore, this process hardly makes road user and enforcement officer fully understand and leads to many problems in handling accidents. Hence, the objective of this research discusses the meaning of legal principle on treating traffic accidents. Then, the legal principle of above treatment is researched via ways of exploring practical experience, constructing graph and reviewing literatures. With respect to major results of this study, there includes accident field investigation, principle of law, accident authentication and judiciary trial. Firstly, at the accident field investigation aspect, according to statistics form Central Police University, the reliable rate of field sketch-maps drafting by policeman only reaches 1/199, which means that huge improvement is necessary because the need of taking legal principle into practice is not fulfilled. Secondly, at the principle of law aspect, followings are worth of considering in order to remain legal principles as basic criteria of authentication: (1) principle of trust, (2) attention and way-giving, (3) violation of traffic law and its relation to accident resulting factors, (4) fore-view and reaction, (5) under conditions whether safety measures can be done or not, (6) obstacle removing and free traffic moving principle, (7) principle of doing whatever one can do to avoid collision, and (8) principle of normal driving experience. Thirdly, at the aspect of accident authentication, the basic on legal principle of fore-view and reaction is most important, it refers to a situation that two drivers move their individual cars, at the same time and space with different speeds and conditions of fore-view, and have own reaction time. Hence, accidents happened in a three-dimension environmental surrounding where four triangles are constructed in terms of elements of (1) human, vehicle, road, (2) time, space, dynamic combination of time and space, and (3) length, width and height, and lead to triple five dimensions adding two extra factors time elapsed form fore-view to collision and speed of response. Hopefully, driving behaviors can be analyzed per 0.1 sec by each spatial dimension. Fourthly, at the aspect of judiciary trial, some officers end out to excessively rely on authentication report and do not confirm and inspect evidences; especially do not find out relevant factors in the line of legal principle. Thus, the outcomes do not have fairness, justice and depart social expectation just because of eager to attaining easy compromise. Judicial persons understand little basic principle of roadway traffic regulations and in turns, errors are generated quite often; at the same time, neither do lawyers play their necessary roles successfully; for instance, most of they only care for results but being right or wrong, only insurance claims but real causes; all of above problems need improvement urgently. To sum up, this paper searches cognitive mistakes of using legal principle in traffic regulations by empirical judgment and case study. The research also aims at discussion of legal principle about traffic regulations in order to find the difference between thinking and applying, and to set up legal concepts correctly. Furthermore, three-dimension thinking models are established by attention and way-giving as well as cause-effect relationship to provide professional missioners useful conceptual ways of evidence collection, evidence choice and evidence validation.
|
|---|
