Judgment

The phrase “self-denunciation” under Article 52(1) of the Criminal Act regarding the assertion of self-denunciation is established when the criminal voluntarily reports the criminal facts to the investigation agency and voluntarily expresses his/her intent to seek prosecution. Thus, the intention of the internal deliberation alone is insufficient and it can be recognized as being externally indicated.

In addition, even if one of the defendants voluntarily surrenders himself, the court can voluntarily reduce the punishment for the self-denunciation, and the court below did not render a reduction of the number of self-denunciation or did not render a decision on the allegation to mitigate the number of self-denunciation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do12041, Dec. 22, 2011). According to the records, the police belonging to the Seoul Gwanak Police Station confirmed the crime of the defendant listed in No. 1 of the crime No. 1 of the annexed Table 1 of the judgment below through CCTV investigation installed inside the bus, etc., and made telephone conversations with the defendant on October 19, 2016. The defendant denied the theft crime, while the defendant is currently male, he could not be informed of the location of the person who was present, and is present as a police station by no later than 12:00 on the same day.

In fact, the police attempted several calls from around 12:00 on the same day, but did not connect with the Defendant, the police conducted an urgent real-time tracking of the Defendant’s telephone number, and the police conducted an urgent real-time tracking of the Defendant’s phone number from around 13:30 on the same day to around 13:45 on the same day, and after tracking the Defendant at around 14:00 on the same day, arrested the Defendant at a place where approximately 100 meters away from the Gwanak Police Station, and thereafter, prepared a statement to the effect that all of the instant crimes are recognized.