The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error or misapprehension of the legal principle) ① The Defendant did not know of the occurrence of an accident, and there was no intention to escape. ② Notwithstanding the difficulty in deeming that it was necessary to take measures to ensure smooth traffic by preventing and removing traffic hazards and obstacles caused by an accident at the time, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case, or erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which affected the conclusion

2. Determination

A. In full view of the degree of shock of vehicles appearing in accident video CDs and photographs, the situation where the damaged vehicle turns on the road after stopping and moving on the road following the accident, etc., it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the accident occurred at the time. Thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. Even though the Defendant did not cause physical damage to the damaged vehicle due to an accident and did not flying on the road, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s driving of the vehicle without getting out of the vehicle and without getting out of it, did not take necessary measures at the time of the occurrence of the traffic accident. The Defendant’s assertion on this part is without merit, as it resulted in another traffic hazard and obstacle by driving away from the Defendant who escaped.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.