Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case.

2. Determination

A. On April 19, 2016, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case was presented as a witness of the Defendant’s case from Jeju District Court 202 to Jeju District Court 202, which was moving from Jeju Island to Jeju Island, including a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Epiking Vehicles) by 2016 Godan 30, Goo-Ma C, etc., and thereafter, from the prosecutor, “A witness is a driver from a police officer.”

the witness after being asked.

11 16 12 13

“A person who was not, or was driven by C” in his inquiry

this section.

testimony, “A broadcast by police officers at the time using a ample ample,” from a prosecutor, to find the Defendant.

“I am to the police officer if I would like to be asked.”

Written Expressions, and broadcasted at the same place.

“The Defendant was driven by the police officer” and continuing to be from the defense counsel

It is necessary to open a door and board a police officer before and after the two sections of the police officer in order to ask questions "I think that the case has no memory."

“A person is driving” under the explanation to the effect that “A person is driving.”

The witness was “C C CCC.”

I responded to “I”.

Therefore, ‘anywhere or not'

It is well aware that he entered the question “.......”

The witness was carrying the police vehicle and the defendant was found in microficial with the inner side of the witness.

“At the time of testimony,” while continuing to be “the police officer called and asked the driver of the witness,” the witness was driven by C.

“I have clearly talked that I would like to do so.”

The testimony was made in order to be asked "....".

However, the defendant is true.