beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. A summary of the grounds for appeal 1) The Defendant confirmed the victim’s status at the site immediately after the accident and delivered the newspaper to F and L despite the arrival of the delivery to F and L, the victim delivered the newspaper for three hours at the time of the accident. It can be deemed that the victim did not have to receive relief due to an accident, or that the Defendant took necessary measures to rescue the victim.
2) The Defendant directly ordered the victim’s employer interest Defendant and the former F, who was the victim’s employer, to do so, and thereafter F was the victim’s name. Accordingly, the Defendant fulfilled his duty to confirm the identity.
2. Determination as to whether there was a need to take measures such as aiding and abetting a person who actually sustained damage with respect to the establishment of the crime of an escape vehicle under Article 5-3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes should be made by comprehensively taking into account the details and details of the accident, the victim’s age and degree of injury, the circumstances after the accident, etc. However, there was no need to take measures such as aiding and abetting the victim in light of the fact that Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act imposes an emergency relief responsibility on a person who caused the accident
In order to recognize that the victim actively expressed that relief measures need not be taken or that other emergency measures do not need to be taken, objective and clearly at the time immediately after the accident should be revealed. Only for the reasons that there was no big inconvenience in the victim’s movement after the accident, and there was no significant appearance, and that there was no need to do so on the sole basis of the fact that the degree of damage was found relatively minor and ex post facto.
It cannot be readily concluded (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do1317, May 28, 2009; 2014Do214, Mar. 13, 2014). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court and the trial, the following circumstances are revealed.
(1) An aggrieved person shall be accompanied by an accident.