특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주치상)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. Reasons for appeal;
A. According to the evidence submitted by the misunderstanding of legal principles, the defendant has sufficiently recognized the occurrence of a traffic accident, and where the defendant has immediately stopped and proceeded without taking any measures to confirm the existence of the victim's injury, it is not easy to deny the necessity of relief measures. Thus, it constitutes an escape vehicle, and in the process, it constitutes an escape vehicle, and thus, constitutes another traffic danger and obstacle due to the attack of the victim, and thus, constitutes an accident after the accident.
B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, one year of community service, 80 hours) is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the misapprehension of legal principles
A. The lower court determined as to this part of the charges of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the Road Traffic Act (in the case of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, the lower court, in full view of the details and contents of the accident, the victim’s age, the degree and degree of injury, the circumstances after the accident, etc., necessary to rescue the victim due to the instant traffic accident, to prevent traffic danger and interference, and to take measures to ensure smooth traffic flow.
For the reason that it is difficult to conclude it as to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (unnecessary measures after an accident), the court found innocence and found the Defendant not guilty of the reasons for this part, while recognizing the identity of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (domination) and guilty of the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (the act of causing bodily injury)
B. On the basis of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s perception of the occurrence of a traffic accident (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 1) is based on the following: ① According to CCTV images at the time of the accident, both Defendant’s vehicle and the victim’s vehicle may be shaken on both sides.