自一九九九年刑法增訂肇事逃逸罪以來，本罪的保護法益與構成要件解釋成為學說與實務爭論不休的議題，本文評釋之最高法院判決透過本罪保護綜合法益的方式，支持其重刑正當性，並擴大其適用範圍，預料將成為本罪的標竿判決。不過，本文分析指出，本判決對肇事逃逸的事實認識有所偏頗，其所運用之法益論述反而是在掩飾本罪的正當性疑義，並且導致違反罪刑相當原則、降低法安定性的適用後果。因此本文建議，在修法之前，應回歸保護生命與重大身體法益的觀點，將本罪視為平衡大眾交通危險的特殊遺棄罪，以此作為解釋本罪的基礎。同時，立法者不應再漠視本罪的改革必要性，儘速完成修法。 Ever since the amendment of Criminal Code of Republic of China in 1999, there has been ongoing debate on the legal interest and the prerequisites for hit and run offense. In this article it is held that the decision of Supreme Court case of 104 Tai Sun 2570 will be a benchmark ruling. The court acknowledged the importance of protecting multiple legal interests for hit-and-run offense, and consequently upheld the severe punishment as well as the expansion of scope of penalties. However, the court misunderstood several facts of hit-and-run behaviors and have used the discourse of multiple legal interests as an excuse to avoid the examination of legitimate defects of the disputed traffic crime, causing the violation of the principle of proportionality and the decrease of the legal stability. In this article, it is suggested that the purpose of hit-and-run offense should be to protect life and to avoid severe physical harm. It should be regarded as a special type of crime of abandonment designed to balance the dangers of the public traffic. This article aims to provide the basis of interpretation for the future amendment to the hit-and-run offense.