A. The Defendant was unaware of the instant accident, and there was no intention of escape.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Examining the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on the circumstances stated in the lower court’s judgment regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court’s determination is justifiable.

① After the first shock between the Defendant’s vehicle and the damaged vehicle, the damaged vehicle moved in the front of the Defendant vehicle.

The Defendant was driving a motor vehicle due to a motor vehicle driving;

하더라도 최초 충격 직후에는 잠에서 깼을 가능성이 높고, 그렇다면 피고인 차량 앞으로 회전하는 피해 차량을 피고인은 인식하였을 것으로 보인다.

(2) At the time when the vehicle damaged by snows passes ahead of the Defendant’s vehicle, the Defendant was shut down.

하더라도 피고 인의 차량과 피해 차량 사이에 4번이나 충격이 있었다는 점을 감안하면 피고인은 이 사건 사고 직후에는 잠에서 깼을 것이고, 그렇다면 이 사건 사고로 인한 충격으로 교차로에서 담벼락 쪽으로 향하는 피해 차량을 사이드 미러 (side mirror) 등을 통해 보았을 것이다.

③ Following the instant accident, the Defendant seems to have stopped immediately after the instant accident, but rather deemed to have perceived the instant accident, not because he/she perceived that the instant accident occurred.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's assertion of mistake of the above facts.

B. The degree of damage caused by the instant accident to the victims is not severe, and the Defendant does not want the punishment of the said victim under an agreement with the victim D, and the Defendant has no record of the same crime.

And vehicles operated by the defendant are also covered by comprehensive insurance.

However, the defendant is the defendant.