The gist is that we are looking at a patent for a device that contains
a camera and a processor which it uses to drive a car.
We've been experimenting with autonomous cars for years. Surely Toyota
is not the first to use a camera (er, image taking section) to give
its car a view of the road. Does anyone know of any specific prior art
Are you looking for prior art that might anticipate or make obvious "a device that contains a camera and a processor which it uses to drive a car" or prior art that might anticipate or make obvious the actual claim you posted? They're two very different things.
In other words, if you care about this patent application in particular then, as user96 pointed out, you need to look for prior art that discloses all the elements of the claim (alone or in combination), not that has the same general gist.
Look at the link to the Tartan Racing vehicle that Alex Miller posted.
Boss is a Chevy Tahoe with over 500,000 lines of code to autonomously
navigate in town and in traffic. Boss uses perception, planning and
behavioral software to reason about traffic and take appropriate
actions while proceeding safely to a destination.
Boss is equipped with more than a dozen lasers, cameras and radars to
view the world. High-level route planning determines the best path
through a road network. Motion planning requires consideration of the
static and dynamic obstacles detected by perception, as well as lane
and road boundary information, parking lot boundaries, stop lines,
speed limits, and similar requirements. Boss handles surprises such as
other vehicles running a stop sign or making sudden stops or turns.
Defensive driving skills allow Boss to avoid crashes.
Tartan Racing technology enables Boss to:
Follow rules of the road
Detect and track other vehicles at long ranges
Find a spot and park in a parking lot
Obey intersection precedence rules
Follow vehicles at a safe distance
React to dynamic conditions like blocked roads or broken-down vehicles
Active safety can play a huge role in countering accidents from cell
phone usage, drowsiness and drinking. Human payoffs for Urban
Challenge technology include improved safety, and enhanced driving
We can safely assume the claim's "an image taking section" corresponds to a camera so that limitation is met, but what about the next one:
an image processing section for detecting  a lane dividing line on
the road surface which is traveled upon, by using the image taken by
the image taking section, and setting a virtual lane dividing line in
a section in which no lane dividing line is detected;
Even though we can safely assume from the disclosure on the Tartan site that "Boss" has image processing capabilities that would correspond to "an image processing section" without any added qualifications, there's no disclosure that relates to anything corresponding to the much more specific "an image processing section for detecting a lane dividing line ... and setting a virtual lane dividing line...."
From an anticipation point of view, we're already done with the Boss website (which isn't to say the Boss doesn't have this capability - it's just not disclosed on the website and thus the website does not anticipate the claim).
And of course there's the fact that this is just a claim from an application - it hasn't been allowed and may not even be a current claim (e.g. the applicant may have amended or cancelled it since publication). Assuming it's still pending, your best source of prior art is to look at what the examiner has already cited against the claim during prosecution.