[2012 Highest 3371]

1. On August 24, 2012, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes), violation of the Road Traffic Act (Measures Taken after Accidents), and the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Road Act”) committed a two-lane change to the two-way line in the direction of sampling distance from the direction of sampling distance by driving a three-lane road in front of the Seogsan-dong Capital, Seogu, Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, while under the influence of alcohol content 0.121%.

At the time, there was a new wall at the time, and there was a lot of traffic of the vehicle, so that a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by faithfully taking into account the aspect of trying to change the vehicle line and by giving back the direction.

Nevertheless, while under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant, while entering the second line by negligence, who neglected to take care of the side and the second line, failed to stop immediately and escaped without taking necessary measures, even though it was damaged by the victim’s vehicle’s 2,98,178 won and damaged the victim’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s

2. Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Road Traffic Act, as described in the preceding paragraph, the Defendant committed a traffic accident and escaped with the center line following the occurrence of the traffic accident, and committed a collision, and committed a road at the entrance of an area located outside the mountainous district located in Seogu, Seo-gu, Daejeon at around 04:16, along with the flow from the center of sampling at the direction of the city of mountainous district located in Seo-gu, Daejeon at around 0.121% of blood alcohol content while neglecting an execulation, and by negligence, the Defendant was the victim J. and the victim J. who was the passenger of the victim, who was the driver of the I cargo vehicle at the front direction of the Defendant’s vehicle.