论文部分内容阅读
开栏的话： 本刊去年《案例会诊》栏目开办以来，收到大量读者来信。来信者大多数是交通事故的当事人。他们对公安机关作出的事故责任认定持有异议，因此寄来案情材料，请求交通事故处理专家作出权威诊断。其中有的案情简单，无须会诊，但又不乏警示意义。为此，本刊从今年第一期开始另辟《一案一评》专栏，不定期地将这些案件及本刊“高警督”的评析公之于众，供广大读者学习交通法规时作为实例参考。
Open the words: This magazine last year, “Case Consultation” column since the start, received a large number of readers letters. Most of the letter recipients are parties to traffic accidents. They disagreed with the identification of the accidental responsibility of the public security organ. Therefore, they sent the materials of the case and requested the traffic accident expert to make an authoritative diagnosis. Some cases are simple and do not need consultation, but there is no lack of warning significance. To this end, this issue from the first phase of this year opened another “a case of a comment” column, from time to time in these cases and the publication of “High Commissioner” analysis made public, for the majority of readers to learn traffic laws and regulations as an example.