A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles and mistake, the Defendant was driving at low speed at the time, and the victim did not appeal the pain, as well as the damaged vehicle was also destroyed even if it was destroyed by the crime. Therefore, the Defendant suffered injury by the instant accident.

Since it was not known, there was no intention to commit an escape.

In addition, if one of the circumstances is the same, it cannot be deemed that the degree of the victim's wife's injury reaches the degree of being evaluated as an injury under the Criminal Act, and that the defendant was obliged to take relief measures to prevent traffic danger and injury.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (the penalty amounting to 5,000,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① the defendant took a light to the effect that the defendant was sent to the victim after hearing the words that he would process insurance upon the occurrence of the accident in this case, and the victim was faced with her husband who was in contact with her husband for the management of the accident, ② the defendant did not inform the victim of her name or contact before her leaving the site (as of No. 28 of the trial record, No. 56 of the evidence record, No. 29 of the trial record, No. 40 of the evidence record), ② the victim did not have any information about her name or contact before her leaving the site (as of No. 29 of the trial record, No. 40 of the evidence record), ③ the victim was shocked with milch with the victim at the time of the occurrence of the accident in this case, ④ The defendant continued to receive from the accident in this case and the accident in this case, and the evidence No. 27 of the trial record No. 40 of this case (the trial record).