A. Since the Defendant did not recognize the instant accident itself, the lower court found the Defendant’s criminal intent to commit an escape. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of suspended sentence for one year, two years of probation observation and community service order 240 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, i.e., the Defendant’s spouse, who was accompanied by the piracy at the time of the instant accident.

J A. Around July 6, 2016, 10:53, a few hours after the instant accident occurred, he/she directly driven the instant sea vehicle.

On July 11, 2016, 2016, after the police investigation, the police officer took the driver's seat and the chief image materials of the defendant's vehicle taken by the police officer in front of the scene of the accident to J and the driver's seat and the J on July 16, 2016, that the defendant was present at the police station together with the defendant, and the facts that the defendant was the driver of the damaged vehicle.

진술을 번복한 점, ③ 피해차량 운전자인 E은 이 사건 사고 당시 상황에 대하여 “ 사고 당시 ‘ 쾅’ 하는 소리가 엄청 크게 났습니다.

A. The vehicle shall be received from the head of the vehicle to the first half of the vehicle.

The second head door was damaged to the degree that the door is to be closed because the door is damaged to the degree that it would be left away from the beginning.

제 차 오른쪽 앞 범퍼도 손상되었고 차가 좌우로 기우뚱 했는데 겨우 브레이크로 균형을 잡았습니다.

Therefore, it is not easy to say that the perpetrator was unaware of the occurrence of an accident.

After the accident occurred, the defendant was able to have his spouse drive by telephone to his low-income person after the accident occurred.

If the agreement is defective, if the driver of the household is not a woman but a male, i.e., the defendant.