The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A prosecution against the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is instituted.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) At the time of the instant accident, the Defendant was straightening along the main road, while the victim was making a bypass on the main road, the Defendant had the priority to proceed, and the victim violated the right and the right and right before entering the intersection, while making a bypass the instant accident even before entering the intersection.

The instant accident was not caused by the Defendant’s occupational injury or loss.

2) The defendant had no intention to flee.

After the accident of this case, the defendant confirmed the state of the victim, asked the neighbor who observed the accident that could not report because the jury of the mobile phone was laid off, and asked the witness to report the accident, and gather the parents of the witness at the home because the house of the defendant was close at the accident place.

Then, it was temporarily set away at the accident place.

The defendant informed the her father of the fact of the accident and caused the her to conduct the accident management.

Defendant

In addition, since the injury was suffered, it was not possible to take direct relief measures against the victim, but did not escape without taking necessary measures after the accident.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the fact that it pronounced guilty of the facts charged of this case and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, community service, 40 hours, and the lecture attendance order of 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who is engaged in driving a motor vehicle of Drails.

On August 19, 2014, the Defendant driven the above car at around 01:00, and driven the intersection without a signal of the shooting distance in front of Daegu Dong-gu E, by using a fire-fighting road that does not pass from the parallel to the parallel of the parallel, and thus, the Defendant is well able to see the direction and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the system