beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the shock degree at the time of the traffic accident (hereinafter “accident”) as indicated in the judgment of the court below concerning the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, the victims cannot be deemed to have suffered injury to the extent that the victims need relief measures, and even if the defendant immediately stops the vehicle after the accident and reported it to the police, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles and misapprehension of legal principles.
B. The judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence or in the misapprehension of legal principles, since the Defendant was at the time of driving, and the blood alcohol level measurement was conducted 74-84 minutes after driving. Thus, it cannot be readily concluded that 0.131%, which is the result of the above measurement, is the blood alcohol level of the Defendant at the time of driving.
2. Determination
A. The crime of escape after the injury under Article 5-3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is established when the driver who committed the crime under Article 268 of the Criminal Act due to the transportation of a motor vehicle does not take any measure such as aiding and abetting the victim, leaving the scene of the accident and resulting in a situation in which it is impossible to confirm the identity of the person who caused the accident. The issue of whether there was a need for relief shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the details and contents of the accident, the victim's age, the part and degree of the injury, the circumstances following the accident, etc.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1339 Decided July 10, 2008). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, such as the result of the verification of black boxes and video images, the Defendant is driving a motor vehicle with Cins around 00:50 on April 24, 2012.