The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that the accident of this case occurred with the wind of the victim driving along the road, so there is no fault of the defendant in the occurrence of the accident of this case, and because the victim cannot be deemed to have suffered bodily injury under the Criminal Act, the court below found him guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In light of the legislative intent and protected legal interests of Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Special Crimes Act”) and Article 148 of the Road Traffic Act, in a case where it is not deemed necessary for an accident driver to take measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as the situation and contents of the accident, the victim’s age and degree of injury, and circumstances after the accident, etc., in light of the legislative intent and protected legal interests of Article 5-3(1) of the Road Traffic Act, the crime of violation of Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 148 of the Road Traffic Act is not established even if the accident driver actually left the place without taking measures such as aiding the victim, even though the accident driver did not take measures such as aiding the victim, the necessity and degree of the accident, the situation after the accident, the period and contents after the accident, the victim’s age and health condition, etc. shall be determined after considering the victim’s direct dialogue with the victim (see 20.).