도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to each evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the gist of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) can be sufficiently recognized without taking a "measures" as stipulated in Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, and the fact that the defendant left the scene of the accident is sufficiently recognized, by neglecting his/her duty of care, by neglecting his/her duty of care in the course of performing his/her duties and destroying the parts adjacent to the front part of the damaged vehicle to cover KRW 493,268, the repair cost of the damaged vehicle due to his/her negligence (hereinafter “the instant accident”) and providing the victim with personal information and contact information.
Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the “measures” or the necessity of the driver of the accident in the event of a traffic accident pursuant to Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Examining the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below (in particular, video CDs) and the reasons for the judgment of the court below closely, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, based on the circumstances stated in its holding, was necessary to take measures to ensure safe and smooth traffic by preventing and removing traffic risks and obstacles pursuant to Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act at the time of the instant accident.
It is difficult to recognize that there is no other evidence to prove it, and it is reasonable to find the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds that there is no other evidence to prove it, and there is a mistake of misconception of facts or a misunderstanding of legal principles
subsection (b) of this section.
Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit.