The prosecution against the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who is engaged in driving a car in the CSP site owned by the Defendant.

On July 23, 2011, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at around 22:10, while driving the above vehicle in the direction of distribution ICT, the victim D, who walked on the street at around 744-15, Seoul Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seoul at night, was in a situation where the surrounding view was not revealed at night at that time, and at that time, at the time of the accident, the driver of the vehicle is in the vicinity of the crosswalk. In such a case, the driver of the vehicle is in the vicinity of the crosswalk, and the driver of the vehicle is in a correct operation of the brake and steering gate, and even if the driver was at the duty of care to prevent the accident by driving the vehicle due to the negligence going well before and after the accident, the Defendant failed to take necessary measures such as rescue and relief.

2. Determination

A. The phrase “the case where a driver of an accident runs away without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding and abetting the victim, etc.” under Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes refers to the case where the driver of an accident deviates from the accident site before performing his/her duty under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding and abetting the victim, even though he/she knew of the fact that the victim was killed and injured (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do250, Mar. 12, 2004). Here, the degree of awareness of the fact that the victim was killed and injured is sufficient if the driver of an accident knew of the fact that the victim was not necessarily required to be confirmed, and even if

Supreme Court Decision 99Do5023 delivered on March 28, 2000