The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles or factual errors);

A. It cannot be deemed that there was a need to take relief measures against the victim, as the victim did not location the “injury” under the Criminal Act due to the instant accident.

B. At the time of the instant accident, there was no need to take relief measures after the instant accident, since there was no marbling of the vehicle and subsequently moving the vehicle after the accident.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to whether the victim was injured, namely, ① the Defendant entered the intersection at the time of the instant accident with a speed of about 20 km, without stopping or driving, and caused an accident involving repair costs of 1.4 million won due to the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle without discovering the victim’s vehicle’s driver’s seat at the time of the instant accident; ② the victim was diagnosed as having suffered an injury, such as the relevant conical base and left-hand scale, which require treatment for about 2 weeks after the instant accident; ② the victim was diagnosed as having been diagnosed as having suffered an injury, such as the relevant scale and left-hand scale at the time of the investigation; ③ the victim was diagnosed as having been given the victim’s oral treatment before the date of the instant accident, and ④ the victim was given the victim’s oral treatment at the time of the instant accident, and ④ the victim was given the victim’s oral treatment at the time of the instant accident.