The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the circumstances leading up to the instant accident, the degree of damage to each vehicle caused by the instant accident, and the injury inflicted on the victim, the court below found the Defendant not guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the Road Traffic Act, although the Defendant left the site without taking confirmation measures on the occurrence of the instant accident, since the Defendant could have suffered the injury at the time of the instant accident, and even if he could have caused the traffic danger and impediment due to the instant accident, the Defendant was found guilty. In addition, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (six months of imprisonment without prison labor and two years of suspended execution) is too unjustifiable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who is engaged in driving a car with Culul.

At around 23:55 on May 11, 2012, the Defendant made a left turn to the face of apartment space because the crossing of private distance in the evis-gu, Ulsan Metropolitan City is remote from the view of air conditioners.

Since there is an intersection where signal, etc. is installed, a person engaged in driving service is not negligent in performing the duty of care to drive safely in accordance with the signals, and in such a case, the victim D (the age of 42) who is driving in the direction of coolant distance from the surface of each valley industrial complex in accordance with the eNFst or another taxi driver's front taxi driver's vehicle driven by the defendant as part of the vehicle behind the vehicle operated by the defendant, suffered injuries such as salt, tension, etc. of the bones of neck that require two-day medical treatment, and at the same time, did not take necessary measures such as providing relief to the victim, even if the damaged vehicle is damaged to the extent that its repair cost is 75,557 won or more.