The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person engaged in driving CITI100 two-wheeled vehicles.

On April 29, 2016, at around 17:41, the Defendant stopped immediately and escaped without taking necessary measures, such as providing relief to the victim, while the Defendant took the bicycle of the victim D (year 4) who was going to go to the left by occupational negligence and going to the left, from the direction of 102 to the 110 direction, within the 100 east apartment located in the local administration city of the local-nam Eup at the local level.

2. Summary of the defendant and defense counsel;

A. Although the defendant's Obane shocked the victim's bicycle, the traffic accident in this case is very minor and the victim cannot be deemed to have suffered injury due to the traffic accident in this case.

B. Even if the victim sustained the injury due to the instant traffic accident, in light of the background, degree, etc. of the instant traffic accident, the Defendant was not aware that the victim sustained the injury due to the instant traffic accident.

3. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence of probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected of guilty, even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 9Do4305 delivered on February 25, 2000, 2002Do6110 delivered on February 11, 2003, etc.). The phrase “when a driver runs away without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding victims,” as provided in Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, “when a driver runs away without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act.”