The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not escape from the scene of a traffic accident (hereinafter “accident”) as indicated in the judgment below, and did not have any intent to commit an escape, and the victims cannot be deemed to have suffered bodily injury due to minor accidents, and the lower court convicted the Defendant by admitting the facts as erroneous and sentenced him/her.

2. Determination

A. In light of the legislative intent and protected legal interests 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, in a case where it is not deemed necessary for an accident driver to take measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as the situation and contents of the accident, the victim’s age and degree of injury, and circumstances after the accident, etc., in light of the legislative intent and protected legal interests of Article 5-3(1) of the Road Traffic Act, even if the accident driver actually does not take measures such as aiding the victim, it does not constitute a violation of Article 5-3(1) of the Specific Crimes Act or a violation of Article 148 of the Road Traffic Act, even if the accident driver leaves the place without taking measures such as aiding the victim, the necessity and degree of the accident, the situation after the accident occurred, the period and contents of the treatment, the age of the victim, and the age and health condition of the victim.

The following circumstances acknowledged in accordance with the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., victim F immediately after the accident.