The issue of whether to accept the application for examination of evidence falls under the discretion of the court. Thus, even if the court of first instance or the court below rejected the application for the delivery of documents by the defendant, the application for witness, and the application for verification, it cannot be deemed unlawful.

In addition, Article 299 of the Criminal Procedure Act can be limited to the extent that it does not infringe on the essential rights of the person related to the lawsuit when the statement or examination of the person related to the lawsuit is overlapping or irrelevant to the lawsuit.

“Inasmuch as the lower court prescribed that the examination of the Defendant was conducted in the examination of the witness, even if the lower court restricted the examination of the Defendant based on the right to direction the lawsuit on the grounds that the examination of the Defendant overlaps or is irrelevant to the

subsection (b) of this section.

This part of the grounds of appeal is without merit.

Meanwhile, the argument of the grounds of appeal to the purport that the trial was conducted in the state of coercion and that there was an error of infringing on the right to a fair trial and the right to defense of the court of first instance and the court of appeal cannot be accepted in light of the progress of the trial

Other grounds of appeal are not legitimate grounds of appeal as provided in Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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