1. Part of the defendant's case

A. As to the allegation in the grounds of appeal on admissibility of evidence, the lower court found the following facts: (a) during the field identification process immediately after the instant crime was conducted by the police, the police discovered the chain owned by the Defendant and the person requesting an attachment order (hereinafter “the Defendant”); (b) removed it without due process, such as voluntary submission; and (c) requested the National Institute of Scientific Investigation (hereinafter “State”) to conduct genetic analysis of the chain without obtaining a warrant for seizure of the chain; (d) on June 10, 2013, the State and the number responded to the “written appraisal” that found the genes of the Defendant and the victim’s genes from the chain chain; and (e) on July 30, 2013, the police, in violation of the first instance procedure for examining the Defendant, should have been examined on the grounds that the victim’s genes was detected in the chain chain; and (e) the police, without due process for ex officio submission, should have been conducted in the process of collecting evidence from the Defendant’s investigative agency after the completion of the warrant.