특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. In full view of the evidence duly submitted by the prosecutor, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, although the defendant was not guilty of the facts charged in this case, even though he did not take measures such as aiding and abetting the victim as well as taking measures to the extent that it is ordinarily required to prevent or eliminate traffic danger, he did not guilty of the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding such facts.
2. Determination
A. Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes provides that “When a driver of an accident runs away without taking measures as prescribed in Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding a victim or aiding a victim, etc.” refers to a case where the driver of an accident deserts the accident site before performing his/her duty as prescribed in Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding a victim, even though he/she knew of the fact that the victim was killed or injured, resulting in a situation in which it is impossible to determine who caused the accident. The purpose of Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act is to prevent and eliminate traffic risks and obstacles that occur on the road and ensure safe and smooth traffic by preventing and removing them. In such a case, measures to be taken by the driver shall be appropriately taken according to the specific circumstances, such as the content and degree of damage, to the extent that is ordinarily required in light of a sound form. This includes identifying the identity of the driver of the accident, but the driver of the accident, such as the Road Traffic Act, provides relief to the victim.