마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
The court below asserted that the prosecutor's statement concerning F is admissible as evidence under Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act, contrary to the argument of misunderstanding the legal principles as to the admissibility of evidence of the prosecutor's statement concerning the summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper sentencing), misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below), and misunderstanding of legal principles as to the admissibility of evidence of the prosecutor's statement concerning F on the seventh trial of the court below. The prosecutor'
Nevertheless, the court below arbitrarily excluded the admissibility of the above prosecutor's protocol, and thereby violated the procedure of raising an objection to the investigation of evidence under Article 296 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Since the point of time when F made a statement from the prosecution as a witness ( July 3, 2017), the point of time when F made a statement as to the right to refuse to make a statement was prosecuted ( December 13, 2016), F was in the position of a criminal defendant, not a criminal suspect, at the time of the public prosecutor’s statement.
In other words, since F is not in the position of the suspect against the crime related to this part of the facts charged, F is not in the position of the suspect, the admissibility of the written statement by the prosecution against F cannot be rejected just because F did not notify F of the right to refuse to make a statement.
In addition, although the part concerning the medication of philophone is in the relation of the defendant and F, the part concerning the receipt of philophone is a single crime by the defendant, and the F statement stating that "B gave philophone to the defendant," is a witness, so this part did not notify F of the right to refuse to make a statement.
Even the admissibility should be recognized.
In relation to Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act, ① The defendant led to confession of this part of the facts charged at the time of interrogation of the police, and F also recognized this part of the facts charged at the time of interrogation of the police.