The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are proceeding to a place less than 200 meters away from the site of the traffic accident in this case.

In light of the fact that the taxi driver followed the accident, and immediately reported the 112 report, the victim's injury was bral with 2 pulse pulse, thale, and stude, and the fugitives caused by the instant traffic accident were not on the road, etc., the Defendant appears to have failed to recognize the occurrence of the instant traffic accident, and even though the instant traffic accident did not cause any danger and obstacle to road traffic, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In addition to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant recognized the occurrence of the instant traffic accident, and that there was a danger and obstacle to road traffic due to the instant traffic accident. Therefore, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles is without merit.

1) In light of the following circumstances as to whether the Defendant recognized the instant traffic accident, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant recognized the occurrence of the instant traffic accident. (A) The victim took the left-hand turn from the slope of the pressure zone to the opposite intersection and took the right-hand turn to the two-lanes, and the Defendant proceeding the lane near the one-lane after the right-hand turn to the opposite intersection from the Hanyang Apartment apartment to the opposite intersection. (7, 47 pages of the investigation record), and the Defendant proceeded to the opposite part of the Defendant’s driver’s seat on the side of the vehicle. (7, 47 pages of the investigation record), shock, and shock around the shock.