The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the instant traffic accident of erroneous mistake is minor, the victim cannot be deemed to have suffered the "injury" under Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, and there was no intention to flee to the defendant.

In the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, there is an error of mistake.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Special Crimes Act”)

In light of Article 5-3(1) of the Act and Article 148 of the Road Traffic Act, in light of the purpose of legislation and protected legal interests, etc., if it is not deemed necessary for an accident driver to take measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as providing relief to the victim in fact, considering the details and contents of the accident, the age and degree of the victim, and the degree of the injury, circumstances after the accident, etc., the accident driver does not constitute a violation of Article 5-3(1) of the Act or a violation of Article 148 of the Road Traffic Act even though the accident driver actually left the place without taking measures such as providing relief to the victim. However, the existence of the need to take measures in the event of the accident shall be determined by taking into account the victim’s injury level, the contents and circumstances after the accident, the time and period of the treatment, the age and health of the victim, and the age and health condition of the victim. However, if the defendant directly dialogues the victim with the victim, or at least it is necessary to determine the victim’s condition.