2. In addition to the fact that the court below found the victim's injury level and degree of the accident caused by the traffic accident in this case, the accident and circumstances after the accident (However, the "300 meters" in the 4th parallel 6th parallel 6th parallel of the judgment seems to be a clerical error in the "3 meters"), the time point, period and contents of the treatment, the victim's age and health conditions, etc., and the defendant also stated that the court of the court below and the police did not shock the victim's arms with the victim's arms at the court and the police, but rather stated that the victim thought the victim's arm's length and left the way without any other consideration, it is difficult to view that the victim did not have any injury to the extent that the victim needs medical treatment due to the traffic accident in this case, and that the defendant stopped to take into account the victim's condition.

Inasmuch as it cannot be deemed that there is a need to take relief measures against the victim even if snow exists, the court below's judgment convicting the defendant of a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) by recognizing that the defendant who deserts the scene as it is in such circumstance has the intention to commit a crime of escape, cannot be deemed to have erred in the misapprehension of legal principles or the misapprehension

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit. Thus, the defendant's appeal is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.