The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, although the Defendant was aware of the fact that the instant accident occurred, the second accident may occur if the location in which the instant accident occurred was immediately stopped at the entrance of the tunnel.

After the judgment, U.S. has continued to move back to the scene of accident. Since the victim is not able to see, the defendant had a criminal intent to escape.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of suspended execution for six months of imprisonment, two years of community service order 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s determination as to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and legal doctrine is based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the following circumstances: (i) the Defendant immediately stops after the occurrence of the instant accident and leaves the scene of the accident without taking measures, such as indicating his identity; (ii) the victim remains at the scene of the accident for about 30 minutes after the occurrence of the instant accident and reported to the police; and (iii) the Defendant did not appear at the scene while the damaged person remains at the scene of the accident; (iii) the Defendant reported the fact of the instant accident to the police station on the date of the instant accident; and (iv) sent the same to the police box having jurisdiction over the morning.

However, the Defendant called the police station at around 11:44 on the day following the occurrence of the instant accident, and visited the police station at around 20:00 on the same day, and only visited the police station at around 20:00 on the same day (the 11th page of the evidence record), etc., that the Defendant did not have any intention to commit an escape.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts alleged by the defendant or

subsection (b) of this section.

B. The defendant agreed with the victim to determine the unfair argument of sentencing, and the victim.