The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant, who is under his control, was in charge of relief measures and left the scene, is not guilty of the defendant's escape, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles in the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant.

2. The judgment of the defendant is justified in light of the following circumstances asserted by the defendant, i.e., the victim, who is an employee of the insurance company, by posting a phone to the employee of the insurance company after the occurrence of the accident in this case, had been at the site of the victim's departure from the hospital in the first place after the occurrence of the accident, and had the victim guaranteed payment to the hospital hospitalized by the victim. The defendant's employee G left the accident site and let the defendant move the defendant's vehicle to a nearby parking lot and towing the victim's vehicle by telephone to the industrial company. However, considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant left the scene of the accident before the emergency vehicle despite the victim's restraint, the victim left the scene before the emergency vehicle, the victim was left the scene, and G, who is an employee of the defendant, did not disclose that the defendant's employee of the insurance company, was the employee of the defendant who was the victim of the accident, for the reasons stated in its reasoning

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.