The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant, after the traffic accident of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, led a bicycle and left the scene first without making any particular misunderstanding, left the scene, and did not know the fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, there was no intention of escape. As such, the Defendant’s act does not constitute an escape of a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, since the Defendant’s act did not constitute an escape.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) against the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is established when the victim is killed and injured due to an accident, and the driver of the accident is aware of it causes unaffordable situations to identify who caused the accident as the person who caused the accident, and where it is not recognized that it was necessary to take measures such as aiding the victim, the victim actively expressed that relief measures need not be taken in order to recognize that

Nor can it be readily concluded that there was no need to take such measures on the sole ground that there was no significant inconvenience in the victim’s movement immediately after an accident, and that there was no need to take such measures, solely on the ground that there was no significant inconvenience in the victim’s appearance, there was no injury, and the degree of damage was proven relatively minor.

Supreme Court Decision 2014Do214 Decided March 13, 2014