특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주치상)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The court below's decision dismissing the charges of this case on the premise that the defendant was not aware of the occurrence of the accident even though the defendant knew that the accident leading to the victim occurred at the time of the traffic accident of this case, and even though the defendant escaped, it is improper to dismiss the prosecution of this case.
2. Determination
A. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence of probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected to be guilty, even if there is no such evidence.
Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do9633 Decided November 11, 2010, etc.). B.
According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, the defendant could recognize the fact that he shocked F by occupational negligence while driving a vehicle at the time of the accident, and thereby, F suffered injury requiring medical treatment for about four weeks, and the defendant left the scene without taking necessary measures, such as aiding F immediately after the accident.
C. However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, it is difficult to view that the Defendant, despite being aware of the occurrence of a traffic accident, as stated in the facts charged, runs away without any reasonable doubt, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just, and it cannot be said that there was an error affecting the judgment by misunderstanding the facts, and the prosecutor's above assertion is not accepted.