Accordingly, the prosecutor appealed and reversed the part of acquittal on February 14, 2013 in the Supreme Court Decision 2012Do11591, and the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for 15 years in the Gwangju High Court Decision 2013No102 after remanding the case, and the judgment (the judgment on review) became final and conclusive on November 28, 2013 in the Supreme Court Decision 2013Do1012 (Supreme Court Decision 2013Do102).

2. In the decision subject to a retrial, the summary of the grounds for the request for retrial recognized that “the Defendant, after having the Victim M by an influenite method, went the Victim into a car driving seat by an influence, so that the said Victim was benefiting from a car by an influence.”

However, according to the traffic accident appraisal report dated June 10, 2014 that was newly discovered after the decision for review became final and conclusive, the accident in this case is not caused by the intentional fall of the defendant or another person, and it is recognized that the accident in this case was crashed by the driving force while driving, not by the defendant or another person

This constitutes “when a new evidence is discovered to sentence innocence, etc.,” and there is a ground for retrial under Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial.

3. Determination on the existence of a ground for retrial

A. The phrase “when evidence is newly discovered” to acknowledge innocence, etc. under Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act means that the evidence was not found in a final and conclusive judgment procedure subject to review, or was found.

Even if it is possible to newly discover or submit evidence that could not be submitted, it refers to the time of new discovery or submission.

newness of evidence.