The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A public prosecution against the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is instituted.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not have an intention to flee immediately after the instant accident, and tried to move and park a locked vehicle in order not to obstruct the passage of other vehicles, and the vehicle driven by the Defendant was rapidly driven and led to an abnormal route.

The Defendant revealed his driver’s license and the taxi company belonging to the scene of the accident to the police officer, and sent him to the hospital. Since the Defendant was also injured, the Defendant could not take direct relief measures against the victim and did not escape without taking necessary measures after the accident.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the fact that it pronounced guilty of the facts charged of this case and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person engaging in driving a third-party corporation taxi.

At around 10:40 on November 1, 2013, the Defendant proceeded two lanes of the two-lanes of the narrow-lanes of the narrow-lanes of the Yandong East-gu, Ansan-si, Ansan-si from the shooting distance bank in the west-gu.

When a person engaged in driving service intends to change course, he/she shall not change course when it is likely to impede normal traffic of other vehicles running in the direction to which he/she intends to change course, and when he/she intends to change his/her course, he/she has a duty of care to give an advance notice of change of course by operating direction direction, etc. and to change his/her vehicle line by taking into account the traffic situation

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and caused the victim to go beyond the road by the collision with the unregistered scooter driving by the victim D (Scoo) who was driving in direct direction one lane in the same direction by negligence that the defendant tried to go to the U.S. while moving to the U.S. line.

The Defendant, by occupational negligence, provides approximately two weeks of medical treatment to victims D.