[상해치사][공1993.6.15.(946),1481]
In a case where the part of the defendant's statement and the photographic image of the crime are not recognized to be genuine by the defendant from among the examination records prepared by the judicial police officer (negative)
In cases where the part of the evidence inspection protocol prepared by a judicial police officer is the original person who made the original statement concerning the part concerning the defendant's statement and the photographic image of the crime, and it is not recognized as authentic by the defendant who is the offender, such part shall not
Article 312(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act
[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Domin, Attorneys Park Jong-soo and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant) and 1 other (Law No. 1303, Nov. 24, 1984)
A
Defendant
Attorney B
Seoul High Court Decision 87No2833 delivered on November 26, 1987
The appeal is dismissed.
The number of days of detention after an appeal shall be included in the original sentence 95 days.
The grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 are examined together.
1. According to the records, according to the evidence inspection protocol prepared by the judicial police officer, the part on the defendant's statement, which was a suspect corresponding to the crime of this case, is included in the above verification protocol and the part on the defendant's tension recorded in the record of this case, and a photographic paper is attached to the crime of this case. However, even if the records are examined in detail, they are the original person who made the original statement as to these facts and the defendant's authenticity of the crime is not recognized. Thus, the part on the defendant
Nevertheless, the court below's opinion with regard to the admissibility of the above verification protocol and its adoption as evidence of conviction is illegal, and it is justified to point out that it is erroneous.
2. However, in light of the records, the facts charged against the Defendant resulting in the injury of this case can be recognized by the remaining evidence except for the part of the above verification protocol among the various evidences cited by the court below. Thus, the above illegality of the court below is not affected by the judgment, and it cannot be viewed that there are other illegal grounds such as violation of the law of evidence such as the theory of lawsuit. The argument is without merit.
3. Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and part of the detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Park Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)