Of the facts charged in the instant case, it is not guilty of violating the Road Traffic Act due to the failure to take measures after destroying property.

【Non-Offense Division】

1. Around 18:55 on March 30, 2018, the Defendant changed the lane to two-lanes depending on the two-lanes of the Ulsan Highway (Ulsan-gun) located in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, by driving a B SPP car, from March 30, 2018, the Defendant: (a) changed the lane from the two-lanes to the Ulsan-gun located on the side of the Glsan-gun; (b) while driving the 0.6km road from the Glsan-gun, the Defendant did not check the two-lanes of the DP-W car driven by the victim C (nive, 23 years of age) but without verifying the two-lanes while driving the said sP car; (c) at the same time, the Defendant was rapidly able to avoid the above sP car; (d) the victim’s 2-day treatment and the number of days of the kneeng-gun and the 2-day treatment of the victim, e.g., the victim’s e.

2. Determination

A. “A case where a driver of an accident runs away without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding a victim,” as prescribed by Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Special Crimes Act”) refers to a case where the driver of an accident runs away from the scene of the accident before performing his/her duty under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the victim, although he/she knows that the victim was killed due to an accident, resulting in a situation in which it is impossible

In addition, there is a relation between the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the commercial concurrence.