The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (after-accident), the Defendant did not receive a victim’s taxi, and the victim’s taxi was involved in the accident.

Even if the Defendant did not recognize an accident, the Defendant did not recognize it.

B. As to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes), the defendant's vehicle at the time when the taxi of the victim stops is already left behind and left behind while G was not in a situation where it was possible to attach the driver's seat to the defendant's vehicle, and the snow company G added the driver's seat to the defendant's vehicle.

Even if the Defendant did not recognize it, the injury of G was extremely minor, and at the time, the relief measures under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act were not necessary.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below's duly adopted and examined evidence as to the argument on the violation of the Road Traffic Act (i.e., the victim taxi driver G from the investigative agency to the court below's court, and consistently stated that the defendant's vehicle went back to the left part of the victim taxi in the alleyway. ② The defendant's vehicle turns back the defendant's vehicle toward the defendant's vehicle moving out of the alley road without the victim taxi. ② The defendant's vehicle turns back to the defendant's vehicle. ③ However, the defendant's vehicle going back at the rapid speed of the defendant's vehicle, leaving the road at the rapid speed, leaving the road, leaving the vehicle at the speed of the defendant's speed, leaving the road, leaving the road, leaving the road, leaving the vehicle at the right part of the defendant's vehicle, and leaving the scene and the fact that the defendant got out of the scene.