[1] The meaning of the crime of escape of an offender under Article 151 of the Criminal Code, the meaning of "a person who commits a crime corresponding to a fine or heavier punishment" under the same Article, and the criteria for determining the awareness thereof, and whether the crime of escape of an offender is established in a case where a person who is not the offender is a criminal in an investigative agency and makes a false statement to the investigation agency, causing an obstacle to the arrest and detection of the criminal (affirmative)

[2] The case holding that the crime of escape of an offender is established

[1] The crime of escape of a criminal under Article 151 of the Criminal Act refers to an act which makes it difficult or impossible to act as a criminal justice such as investigation, trial, and execution of a sentence by means other than concealment of the criminal. There is no restriction on the method, and the above crime does not require any restriction to the effect that it actually interferes with the operation of the criminal justice. In addition, the crime is a dangerous crime, and "a person who commits a crime above a fine" under the same Article includes a person who is under investigation upon being suspected of a crime, and the awareness of a person who commits a crime above a fine includes a person who actually commits a crime above a fine, and it is sufficient that the statutory punishment is more than a fine, and it is sufficient that the perception of a person who commits a crime above a fine is the person who actually commits a crime corresponding to a fine or heavier punishment. The act of causing interference with the arrest and detection of a criminal offender by making

[2] The case holding that even though the crime applicable to an offender is diverse from the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act to the crime of bodily injury through the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, all of the crimes are determined to be sentenced to a fine or more, and the crime applicable to an offender is limited to the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, it cannot be determined that the act of an offender is not likely to be prosecuted or punished solely on the fact that an automobile comprehensive insurance can not be concluded to constitute a case where the act of an offender is not likely to be prosecuted or punished;

[1] Article 151 of the Criminal Act / [2] Article 151 of the Criminal Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 4292Do55 delivered on February 24, 1960 (Gong8, 18), Supreme Court Decision 81Do1931 delivered on January 26, 1982 (Gong1982, 313), Supreme Court Decision 93Do3080 delivered on March 3, 1995 (Gong195Sang, 1654 delivered on December 26, 1995) (Gong196Do1016 delivered on June 14, 196) (Gong196Ha, 2289)

Defendant

Prosecutor

Chuncheon District Court Decision 99No1167 delivered on August 30, 2000

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Chuncheon District Court Panel Division.

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that the defendant's act of escape of the non-indicted is not a crime of escape of a criminal provided for in Article 151 of the Criminal Act because there is no risk of undermining the state's criminal justice act if the defendant had a person who is not likely to be subject to criminal prosecution or punishment, and it does not constitute a crime of escape of a criminal provided for in Article 151 of the Criminal Act, even if the non-indicted person was aware that the non-indicted person was driving on the non-indicted at a point of 08:00 on January 5, 199, at a point of 159:5 km of the Yong-dong Highway, while he was driving on the non-indicted 159.5 km, with the knowledge that the non-indicted person committed a crime of special traffic accident treatment, which constitutes a crime of traffic accident under Article 4 (1) of the Act on the Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, even if the defendant could not be prosecuted or prosecuted.

2. The crime of escape from a criminal under Article 151 of the Criminal Act refers to an act that makes it difficult or impossible to act as a criminal justice, such as investigation, trial, and execution of a sentence, by a method other than concealment of the criminal. There is no restriction on the method. In addition, the above crime not only is a dangerous crime and it is not required to interfere with the actual operation of the criminal justice as a dangerous crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 93Do3080, Mar. 3, 1995); and the term "person who commits a crime punishable by a fine or heavier punishment" under the above Article means a person who is under investigation upon being suspected of a crime (including a person who is under investigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 4292Do55, Feb. 24, 1960; 81Do1931, Jan. 26, 1982). It does not require the criminal to be identified that the criminal is a person who actually committed a fine or more severe punishment.

However, according to the facts charged and the records, if the act of this case by the non-indicted 1 was committed against the defendant, who was on the left side of the accident site, while driving the above car, for 4 weeks of injury. In such a case, the crime applicable to the non-indicted 1 can be applied to the crime of violation of Article 113 subparagraph 1 and Article 44 of the Road Traffic Act from the crime of violation of Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents to the non-indicted 1's criminal intent, it is clear that all of the above crimes are punished more than a fine, and it is hard for the court below to determine that the crime of this case can be applied to the non-indicted 1 as a result of the crime of violation of Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents because it is difficult for the non-indicted 1 to actively prosecute or punish the non-indicted 1 as a result of the crime of violation of the above charges. Thus, the court below's decision does not have any possibility of criminal prosecution or punishment for death.

Nevertheless, the court below's determination that the defendant's act does not constitute a crime of escape solely on the grounds as seen above is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to a person who committed a crime of escape, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Thus, the ground of appeal pointing this out is with merit.

3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cho Cho-Un (Presiding Justice)