The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

With respect to the part of the misunderstanding of facts, the injury suffered by the victim does not constitute an injury under the criminal law, and even if not, it is not so.

Even though the defendant did not recognize the occurrence of an accident, there was no intention of escape.

The punishment (one year of imprisonment) sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes provides that “When the driver of an accident runs away without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the injured party or aiding the injured party,” refers to a situation in which the identity of the person who caused the accident can not be confirmed because the driver escaped from the scene before he/she performed his/her duty under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the injured party, although the driver knew of the injured party, although he/she was aware of the fact that the injured party was killed due to the accident (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do250, Mar. 12, 2004). Here, the degree of awareness of the injured party about the fact that the injured party was killed due to an accident may be sufficiently recognized even if it is not necessarily definitely required to be confirmed, and on the other hand, there is an incomplete perception if the accident was separated from the scene.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do13091, Apr. 28, 2011). The Defendant also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal of this case, and the lower court rejected the said assertion by explaining detailed circumstances under the title of “decision on the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion”.

Examining the above judgment of the court below after comparing it with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and in addition, in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the traffic accident in this case is insignificant.