A. Defendant A is a person who has completed a marriage report with D on May 28, 1986.

On July 3, 2011, the Defendant sent sexual intercourse with B and once in a room in which it is impossible to know the head of the Dong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Eel.

From that time to December 25, 2011, the Defendant respectively passed 10 times in total, as shown in the list of offenses in attached Form, respectively.

B. Defendant B is aware that the above Defendant was a spouse.

At the time, at the same time, as described in the paragraph as above, the period from that time to December 25, 201, including the first sexual intercourse with A, was 10 times in total as described in the attached list of crimes, respectively.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proof of criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is the prosecutor, and the conviction is based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form such a conviction, it is doubtful that the defendant is guilty even if there is no evidence to establish such a degree.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do5114, Jan. 27, 2004).

As to this case, there are D’s legal statement, D’s written statement and each written statement, Defendant A’s statement and police interrogation protocol, text messages and photographs stored in Defendant B handphones.

(1) First, as long as the Defendants denied all the content of Defendant A’s written statement and each police interrogation protocol, each of the above facts charged cannot be admitted as evidence.

(2) Next, D’s investigative agency and this court’s statements, and the content and photographs of text messages stored in Defendant B’s handphones, to the effect that Defendant A was aware of a fact linked to Defendant B.