The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person driving CK5 vehicles.

On October 17, 2012, around 20:15, the Defendant proceeded to turn to the left in the direction of 104-dong parking lots, main apartment, and 104-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong.

In this case, the defendant engaged in driving service has a duty of care to reduce speed by properly checking the front left left side, such as whether there is a pedestrian or a stop on the front side, and to operate the steering direction and brake system accurately.

Nevertheless, the part of the victim D (the age of 36 per party, the remaining)'s right side part of the victim D (the age of 36 per party, the remaining) due to the negligence of driving the vehicle by neglecting it was contacted by the left side of the vehicle.

Defendant’s occupational negligence caused injury to the said victim D with salt and tensions that require two weeks’ medical treatment, and the victim immediately stopped and escaped without taking measures such as providing relief to the victim.

2. The phrase "when the driver of the accident runs away without taking measures provided for in Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the victim under Article 5-3 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes," means the case where the driver of the accident runs away from the accident site before performing his duty provided for in Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the victim although he knows the fact that the victim was killed or injured, resulting in a situation in which it is impossible to confirm who caused the accident. However, the provisions of Article 5-3 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes shall take such measures as aiding the victim who caused the accident by his negligence, in reality that the motor vehicle and the driver