Of those, the conviction against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and eight months.

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of facts-finding and misunderstanding of legal principles (not guilty portion of the judgment of the court below), the defendants conspired with the victim E to obtain the investment funds related to real estate auction and the insurance premiums for the automobile and the car above.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment with labor (one year and six months) against Defendant A is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In a criminal trial on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the recognition of facts must be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the degree of conviction as above, even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictoryly or uncomfortable dismissal, it should be determined as the defendant’s interest (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 2011). In addition, in light of the fact that the criminal appellate trial has the character as a post facto trial even though it belongs to the court, and the spirit of the substantial direct psychological principle as prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Act, etc., in a case where the first instance court found the defendant not guilty of facts on the grounds that there is insufficient evidence to exclude a reasonable doubt after undergoing the examination of witness examination, etc., even if there is a probability or doubt about some opposing facts as a result of the appellate trial’s examination, the court’s determination of mistake of facts cannot be concluded.