사기
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts in the judgment of the court below, which found the defendant guilty on the ground of the statements of C and D, which are not reliable even though the defendant did not have participated in the crime of telephone finance fraud by managing the domestic delivery and remittance of the telephone financial fraud organization, as stated in the judgment of the court below.
2. Determination
A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility in accordance with the spirit of substantial direct deliberation adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the first instance court’s decision and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court was clearly erroneous in the first instance court’s decision on the credibility of the statement made by the witness in the first instance trial in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance trial.
Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial and the result of the additional examination of evidence by the time the appellate trial is final and conclusive, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is different from the judgment made by the appellate court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). B. 1) The lower court found the witness of the first instance trial guilty of the facts charged by adopting the legal statement of the witness C and D as evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012).
2) However, in light of the evidence duly examined by the lower court, the lower court’s determination on the credibility of the witness C and D’s legal statement was clearly erroneous in light of the evidence duly examined by the lower court.
there are special circumstances to consider
In addition, the result of the court below's examination of evidence and the result of the further examination of evidence conducted until the trial is closed.