사기
All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: “The Defendants conspired with the E Defendants to commit the crime of fraud as stated in the instant facts charged,” which became final and conclusive; the Defendants were unable to believe the change of the criminal facts, such as the reversal of the statement made by the investigative agency from time to time; the content of the business plan, quotation, etc. stored in the USB, which was seized at the scene of arresting B corresponds to the instant fraud; and the details of the base station of the large phone used in the crime and the details of the movement of the No.N. vehicles used in the crime correspond to the location of the base station in which the Defendants actually used the crime. However, although it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendants committed the crime of fraud as stated in the instant facts charged, the lower court acquitted the Defendants of the instant facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.
2. Determination
A. The lower court rendered a not guilty verdict on the facts charged in this case on the ground that the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone was insufficient to prove that the Defendants conspired with E to commit the same crime as the facts charged.
B. 1) In a criminal trial, the recognition of criminal facts ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not reach the degree to have the aforementioned conviction, even if there are suspicions of guilt, such as inconsistency with the Defendant’s assertion or defense or non-competence, it should be determined in the interests of the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do231, Jun. 28, 2012). Moreover, in addition, in light of the fact that an appellate trial is in the nature of a post-trial trial even after its appearance, and in light of the spirit of substantial direct deliberation as prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Act, the first instance court examines the witness.