beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, misunderstanding the legal principles, the Defendant confirmed the status of the victims who were deprived of the vehicle immediately after the traffic accident in this case, left the scene with the Defendant’s vehicle located at the accident site, and it was possible to sufficiently verify the identity of the said vehicle due to the Defendant’s name, etc., and thus, it does not constitute a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. In the case of improper preliminary determination of sentencing, the punishment sentenced by the court below (five million won penalty) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination:
A. The phrase “when the driver of an accident runs away without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the injured person or aiding the injured person,” as provided by Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes as to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles refers to the case where the driver of the accident, despite the awareness that the injured person was injured by the accident, leaving the scene of the accident before performing his duty under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the injured person, brings about a situation in which it is impossible to confirm who caused the accident (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3078, Oct. 9, 2008). The court below duly adopted and examined the following facts: (i) the defendant caused a traffic accident involving the injured person by breaking the central line; (ii) the degree of the injured person’s injury by the traffic accident in this case, such as destroying the upper side of the damaged vehicle and damaging the pent, and (iii) the victim’s fine.