Even if the defendant is found guilty, the sentence of the court below (two years of imprisonment, four years of probation, two hundred hours of community service order, 40 hours of lecture order for compliance driving) is too unreasonable.

2. The phrase "when the driver of an accident runs away without taking measures under Article 50 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the damaged person" as provided by Article 5-3 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes to determine the misunderstanding of the facts or the misapprehension of the legal principles refers to the case where the driver of an accident does not take measures under Article 50 (1) of the Road Traffic Act despite his knowledge of the fact that the injured person was killed due to the accident and brings about a situation where it is impossible to determine who caused the accident by leaving the place of the accident, and the case where "measures under Article 50 (1) of the Road Traffic Act" includes revealing the identity of the driver of the accident to the person related to the traffic accident, such as the victim or the police officer, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do5748, Mar. 25, 2003).

We cannot accept the Defendant’s assertion of factual mistake or misapprehension of legal principles.

(1) After the occurrence of an accident, the Defendant remains at the scene of the accident after reporting and telephone calls in 119 and until he/she arrives at the scene of the accident, but the Defendant either reveals to the police officers, etc. that his/her vehicle is a vehicle harmful to him/her.