Defendant

The appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles, damage to the reputation of the head part of the traffic accident caused by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant accident”) on October 21, 2014, annoyed person who does not need separate treatment does not constitute an injury as provided by Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, and there is no need to take measures, such as aiding the victim in light of the details and content of the accident, the victim’s injury, and the degree of injury.

B. The court below’s sentence of unfair sentencing (the fine of KRW 7,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the legislative intent and legal interest and protection of the law of Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Special Crimes Act”) and Article 148 of the Road Traffic Act as to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, in a case where it is not deemed necessary to take measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as the victim’s age and degree, the victim’s injury level and degree, and circumstances following the accident, if the accident driver did not take measures such as aiding the victim and aiding the victim, even if the accident driver left the place without taking measures such as aiding the victim, it does not constitute a violation of Article 5-3(1) of the Special Act or Article 148 of the Road Traffic Act. However, the existence of the need to take measures in the event of the accident shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s injury level and degree, the situation after the accident begins, the period and contents of the treatment, the victim’s age and health condition, etc., but in large case where the defendant did not have given any opportunity for relief.