The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the victim's statement in the investigative agency and the court below's decision, the photograph damaged by the defendant's vehicle and the victim's vehicle, the course of the process, the written estimate, and the expert opinion of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation at the time of the accident, etc., the court below's judgment that acquitted the defendant about the charge of escape is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts.

2. The court below held that the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, namely, (i) the defendant consistently stated in the police that "the defendant: (a) was plucking, plucking, plucking, and plucking down to the left part of the driver's vehicle; (b) the defendant's vehicle, which was flaged by the traffic accident in this case, was flaged into the front left part of the driver's vehicle and the victim's driver's vehicle; (c) the degree of shock was insignificant; (d) it was difficult to confirm the trace of the above contact with the victim's vehicle at night; and (d) the defendant's vehicle was flaged by the victim's body higher than the victim's driver's vehicle; and (d) the victim was unable to reach an agreement with the defendant on the front left part of the driver's vehicle; and (d) the victim did not appeal the police on the day of the accident and did not receive any medical examination before being issued the victim's vehicle."