At around 22:00 on October 5, 2017, the Defendant, at the victim’s house located in the Geumcheon-gu in Busan Metropolitan City on the recommendation of the victim to drink the alcohol together with the victim, was laid to the scam and forced to tow the victim into a simplified bed, and the victim was forced to go out of the victim’s clothes, and the victim was “I Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma. Ma.], the Defendant committed rape by inserting the victim’s body by inserting

2. Determination

A. As shown in the facts charged in the instant case, the police and the prosecutor’s statement for the victim, the victim’s legal statement for the victim, the victim’s legal statement for C, the victim’s legal statement for C, the victim’s small legal statement for D, the CD in which the recording file of the Defendant and the victim’s conversation is stored at the time of the instant case (hereinafter “recording file CD”) and the record thereof.

B. First, we examine the admissibility of the CD and its transcript.

(1) Article 14(1) of the Protection of Communications Secrets Act provides that no person shall record conversations between others that are not open to the public, and Articles 14(2) and 4 of the same Act provide that the contents of conversations obtained by recording in violation of Article 14(1) shall not be admitted as evidence in a trial or disciplinary procedure.

The reason why the Protection of Communications Secrets Act prohibits a recording of a conversation between others that is not open to the public is that a third party who does not participate in the conversation from the original point of view shall not record or listen to the speech between others.

Therefore, recording a statement between others that is not disclosed to the general public by a third party who does not participate in the conversation from the original point of view, barring special circumstances, Article 3 (1) and (2) of the same Act.