The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the instant accident caused not only the accident itself but also the injury to the victim by the victim, which was caused by the rear wheels of the said vehicle prior to the Defendant’s vehicle’s right-hand.

Since there was no circumstance to see, the Defendant agreed with the victim.

I think about the site and leave the site.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby finding the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake, the phrase “when the driver of an accident runs away without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes” refers to the case where the driver of an accident runs away from the scene before performing his/her duty under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the victim, even though he/she knew of the fact that the victim was killed or injured, and it brings about a situation in which it is impossible to confirm who caused the accident. In order to determine whether the driver of an accident runs away from the scene of the accident before he/she performs such duty, the following should be comprehensively taken into account: (a) details and degree of the accident; (b) the part and degree of the victim’s injury; (c) the degree of negligence of the driver of the accident and the victim; and (d) the age and gender of the driver of the accident and the circumstances after the accident (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do6477, Feb. 27, 2014).

When it is not recognized, the driver of the accident shall take measures, such as aiding the victim.