Even if the autonomy of confession is recognized, it is nothing more than that of strict proof of confession, that is, the admissibility of evidence, but also that of confession, the probative value of confession should be admitted as a matter of course. Thus, if there are reasonable grounds to doubt the authenticity and credibility of confession, it cannot be admitted as evidence. The cooking of such confession, etc. belongs to the full power of the fact-finding court unless it violates the empirical or logical rules.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, even if Defendant 2's confessions at the prosecutor's office do not coincide with the circumstances of the crime and take into account trends such as crossinging of juvenile crimes and inducing it into consideration, the Defendants are minors aged 18,17 years old without criminal records, it is not persuasive as a motive to gather tax robbery in order to prepare simple clothes value and expenses for spoke operations, and 84,600 won is included in the calculation of tax base, and 40,00 won per 10 foot bill, it is difficult for the Defendants to obtain it as the result of the Defendants' crimes. The court below rejected the defendants' suspect examination protocol, written statement, verification statement (608 within the investigation records) as evidence, and the victim's testimony or indirect evidence of the victim's spoke, Kim Jong-soo, Kim Byung-hee-hee, Kim Byung-hee-hee, Kim Jong-hee-hee-hee's statement, each of the charges of this case's spoke-hee evidence, and it is not admissible.

In light of the records, the court below's decision to choose the evidence that conforms to the facts charged (in particular, when rejecting the confession of the defendant, it cannot find any defects that are reasonable, reasonable, and any defects in the sales facility) is legitimate and there is no error of law in misunderstanding facts against the rules of evidence or in misunderstanding the legal principles of the free evaluation of evidence by violating the rules of evidence. The arguments are without merit since they merely criticize the lower court's exclusive opinion on the evidence preparation by presenting the defendant's own opinion on the probative value of the confession.

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

Justices Yoon Yoon-tae (Presiding Justice)