The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, a car driven by the Defendant at the time of the instant accident, which was set up by the Defendant and the Defendant’s wife, lost consciousness in the vehicle that was set up by the Defendant and the Defendant’s wife, and returned to home after being rescued as the help of the neighbors.

Therefore, the Defendant did not take necessary measures, such as providing assistance to casualties at the time of the instant case, and was merely subject to relief. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Defendant did not take any “measures normally required in light of sound common sense,” and it cannot be said that there was a criminal intent to escape.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The purport of Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act is to ensure safe and smooth traffic by preventing and removing traffic risks and obstacles on the road. In such a case, measures to be taken by a driver should be taken in accordance with specific circumstances, such as the content of the accident, the degree of damage, and the degree of damage. The degree of such measures means measures to the extent ordinarily required in light of sound form.

I would like to say.

(2) The Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife are merely suffering from the Plaintiff’s check and the Defendant’s wife, and they cannot take necessary measures immediately after the instant accident occurred. (3) The Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife suffered from the Plaintiff’s check and the Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife suffered from the Plaintiff’s check and the Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife and the Defendant’s wife did not take necessary measures after the instant accident occurred.