2. The prosecutor bears the burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial on the judgment-related legal principles, and the conviction should be based on strict evidence with probative value sufficient to conclude that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt by a judge. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the defendant, it shall be determined in the interest of the defendant even if there is no such evidence.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do3163, Jun. 12, 2014). The result of the CD reproduction in this Court’s evidence that seems consistent with the facts charged in the instant case lies in the following: (a) according to the evidence above, the Defendant’s access to the cash payment instruments used by the victim, thereby inserting the hand over to the machine, and then inserting the hands over to the next bats; and (b) the fact that the Defendant remains in the cash payment instrument used by the victim, moving to the left-hand to the cash payment instrument, thereby completing transactions without passbook.

However, the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, namely, ① the Defendant consistently denied the instant charges to the effect that the Defendant did not have any factual difference with the wall on the cash payment machine at the time determined by the police and the prosecution from this court to this court, ② the video CD (a CCTV screen on the front of the entrance and exit CCTV screen) did not appear on the relevant cash payment machine; ③ the victim was placed on the wall on the front of the relevant cash payment machine, and ③ the victim was placed in the co-section between the cash payment machine and the two.