The court below found the defendant guilty on the ground that the defendant's interrogation protocol of the defendant, which was prepared by the prosecutor, was prepared at the end of the examination of the defendant who was a suspect in charge of the defendant's prosecutor's office in the original prosecutor's office in charge of the case, and the prosecutor stated that the defendant and the non-indicted 1 were present at the time of the examination, but the prosecutor did not provide any proof as to the fact that the prosecutor prepared the interrogation protocol, and it cannot be viewed that the defendant's consent to the interrogation protocol of the suspect cannot be seen as true, and the above interrogation protocol of the suspect cannot be viewed as "written statement of the suspect or the non-suspect's statement" under Article 312 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, as long as the defendant denies its contents, it cannot be viewed as evidence of guilt, and the remaining evidence alone cannot be viewed as having been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence by the prosecutor or the court below's decision as to the admissibility of evidence as alleged in the grounds for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Jong-hwan

Justices Park Poe-young

Justices Kim Gi-hwan