특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant’s misunderstanding vehicle is a 27 tons tank lorri vehicle and loaded 27 tons of sea water in the tank at the time of the instant accident, and the Defendant did not fully recognize the collision with the damaged vehicle at the time of the instant accident, and the Defendant did not have an intention to flee.
B. Even if the Defendant had had dolusences on the escape, the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (the penalty amounting to five million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts refers to the case where a driver of an accident runs away from the scene of the accident before performing his/her duty under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding and abetting the damaged person, and without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Special Cases”) refers to the case where the driver of an accident knows that he/she was killed by the injured person due to the accident, thereby bringing about a situation in which it is impossible to determine who caused the accident, because he/she left the scene of the accident before performing his/her duty under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act.
In this context, the degree of awareness of the fact that the injured person was killed due to an accident is not necessarily a final and conclusive, but it is sufficient to recognize even if it is dolusent, and the possibility of escape from the scene of the accident is externally recognized, and if it leaves the scene of the accident, such dolusence exists.
In this case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do13091, Apr. 28, 2011). 2), the following circumstances are as follows, which can be recognized by the court below and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below. In other words, the accident in this case is the left-hand side of the damaged vehicle that the defendant changed the fleet from the two lanes to the three lanes.