Whether leaving the scene where an accident driver conceals himself/herself/herself from the scene where he/she has notified only his/her identity to a police officer constitutes "when he/she attempts" under Article 5-3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes.

If an accident driver conceals the facts he/she committed and leaves the scene of the accident, it shall be limited to the so-called escape as referred to in Article 5-3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes even if the police officer knew his/her identity at the scene.

Article 5-3 of the Specific Crimes

Defendant

Defendant

Sung-dong Branch of Seoul District Court (76Gohap64 delivered on April 1, 200)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

One hundred days of detention days before the sentence of the original judgment shall be included in the above sentence.

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for three years from the date of the final decision.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the public defender is as follows: first, the Defendant did not escape from the traffic accident, but left the site after entering the number of the bus operated by the Defendant to the traffic police officers at the site, and thus, the lower court found the Defendant guilty. Second, the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

Therefore, first of all, the first point of appeal is examined in light of the records of this case, and the facts charged by the defendant can be fully recognized, and there is no error of law as pointed out in the process of fact-finding by the court below (the fact that the defendant committed an accident was concealed and left the scene of accident, so even if his identity was known to a police officer, it shall be deemed that the so-called escape as provided in Article 5-3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is not acceptable).

The second ground for appeal is examined in light of various circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment of the defendant, the cause and result of the accident, relationship with the victim, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence against the defendant of the court below is deemed to be unfair because it is too unreasonable. Therefore, the court below's appeal is reasonable.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the members shall be decided again after pleading.

The criminal facts of the defendant recognized as a party member and the summary of the evidence are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and all of them are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

As the court below's judgment falls under Article 5-3 (1) 1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, since the defendant selected a limited term of punishment, and the defendant voluntarily surrenders to the defendant, the court below's sentence should be considered after mitigation of self-denunciation in accordance with Articles 52 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor and 1 year and 6 months within the scope of the term of punishment for which discretionary mitigation has been made in accordance with Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act. In applying Article 57 of the Criminal Act, the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor and 10 days within the number of detention days before the sentence of the court below, or in addition to the circumstances stated in the above reasons for reversal, etc., it is considered that there was a sufficient compromise between the defendant and his bereaved family members by paying consolation money, etc. of a considerable amount of money, etc., so it is reasonable to suspend the execution of the above sentence for three years.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Limited Jin-jin (Presiding Judge)