A. Defendant: misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

In light of the following facts, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of murdering the victim. (1) There is no direct evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant murdered the victim. There is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant used the weapon; (2) there is no evidence that the victim was the Defendant; and (3) there is no evidence that the victim was dead during the criminal investigation process; (4) there is no evidence that the time of death of the victim was specified; and (3) there is no evidence that the victim was dead during the criminal investigation process; (4) there is no presumption and alteration of the victim’s death time without any scientific basis; and (3) there is no presumption of the victim’s death. Rather, in the middle of the criminal process as stated in the facts charged, it is impossible for the Defendant to prevent the Defendant’s wife from communicating with the Defendant; and (5) there is no time to block the Defendant from using the CCTV during the criminal investigation process; and (4) there is no evidence that there is no possibility that the Defendant could murder the victim’s cell phone after the death of the victim, and there is no evidence that the Defendant could have been found the victim’s key to have been found.

B. Prosecutor: Unfair sentencing

In light of the Defendant’s character and behavior, the motive and method of committing an offense, and circumstances after committing an offense, such as attempting to kill a victim who is a monetary problem, preparing for a spokely, killing the victim, and attempting to destroy evidence, and denying the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is unreasonable compared to that of the prosecutor’s imprisonment.

2. The judgment of the court below

A. On the following grounds, the court below rejected the defense counsel’s appeal against the Defendant and defense counsel, and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case.

① 피고인은 2014. 1. 23. 17:06경 피해자의 주거에 들어갔다가 19:11경 피해자의 주거에서 나왔는데, 피해자의 주거지 건물의 CCTV 영상 등을 분석한 결과 피해자가 그 이후 주거지 밖에서 목격된 사실이 없다. ② 피고인이 피해자의 주거지에 들어간 시간 무렵부터 피해자의 휴대전화 및 일반전화와 통화가 이루어진 번호는 2014. 1. 23. 19:08경 약 40초간 이루어진 피고인의 휴대전화번호가 유일하고, 2014. 1. 24. 08:41 경무렵부터 여러 사람으로부터 피해자의 휴대전화로 걸려온 전화가 '부재중'으로 남아 있다. ③ 피고인의 변호인은 피해자의 애인이었던 G이 범인일 가능성을 주장하였다. 그러나 G이 2014. 1. 24, 2회에 걸쳐 엘리베이터를 탑승하여 피해자의 주거지가 있는 12층에 올라간 사실이 있지만, G이 피고인이 피해자의 주거지에 방문한 후 피해자의 주거지에 들어갈 만한 시간적 여유도 없었고, 피해자를 살해한 사람의 행동으로 보일 행동을 하지 아니하였다. ① 피고인이 피해자의 주거지에서 나간 이후 피해자가 사망한 채 발견될 때까지 피해자의 주거지에 출입한 다른 흔적이 보이지 않고, 위 주거지가 비밀번호를 눌러 여는 주자물쇠 외에 보조열쇠(발견 당시 보조키 4개 중 3개는 한 묶음으로, 1개는 별도로 분리되어 있었음)로 여는 보조자물쇠로 잠겨 있어서 외부로부터의 출입가능성이 거의 없었다. ⑤ 피고인은 피해자의 주거지에서 나와 2014. 1. 23. 19:45 경 자신의 주거지에 들어왔고 그 당시 손에 쇼핑백을 들고 있었다. 피고인은 위 쇼핑백에 피해자로부터 받은 배우자 D의 보험증서와 반찬통이 들어 있었다고 주장하면서도, 위 쇼핑백을 내려놓거나 보험증서와 반찬통을 꺼내놓지 않은 채 현관신발장 앞에서 D에게 자동차 열쇠를 달라고 하여 그대로 들고 밖으로 나간 것은 매우 이례적인 행동이다. 피고인이 위와 같이 주거지에서 나와 같은 날 22:05경 귀가할 때까지 아무런 연락 없이 V을 찾아갔다가 주거지에 불이 켜져 있지 않아 그대로 돌아왔다는 설명도 납득하기 어렵다. ⑥ 피고인은 피해자의 주거지에 방문하였을 때 'NEPA' 브랜드의 오리털 점퍼(이하에서 자주 언급되므로 줄여서 '네파 파카'라 한다)를 입고 있었는데, 그 다음날인 2014. 1. 24. 08:55 경 세탁소에 이를 맡긴 후 같은 날 15:39경 아직 세탁이 완료되지 않은 위 '네파 파카'를 찾아간 다음 이를 버렸다. ⑦ 피고인은 2014. 1. 23. 밤에 위 '네파 파카'를 직접 세탁기에 돌리고 건조대에 널어놓았는데 다음날 아침에 보니 오리털이 한쪽으로 쏠리는 등 손상되어 세탁소에 맡겼고 세탁 후 찾았으나 여전히 오리털이 한쪽으로 쏠려 있는 등 입을 수 없을 것 같아서 의류수거함에 버렸다고 주장한다. 세탁소의 주인인 J은 피고인이 위 '네파 파카'를 가져왔을 때 그 옷이 물에 젖어 있거나 오리털이 한쪽으로 쏠리는 등 손상되어 있지 아니하였고 피고인이 위 '네파 파카'를 찾아갈 때에도 위 오리털 점퍼의 건조가 완료되지 아니한 상태이기는 하였으나 오리털이 한쪽으로 쏠리는 등으로 손상된 것은 아니었다고 증언하였다. ⑧ 피고인이 2014. 1. 27. 피해자가 사망한 채 발견되자 자신의 휴대전화의 통화내역 등을 모두 삭제하였다. ⑨ 피고인은 피해자로부터 5,000만 원을 투자받아 그 수익금을 피해자에게 주고 있었는데, 이 사건 당일 아침에도 D에게 수익금을 지급하는 것에 관한 어려움을 토로하기도 하였다. ① D은 최초 수사기관에서 피고인이 피해자에게 위 투자금 5,000만 원을 현금으로 상환하는 것을 목격하였다고 진술한 바 있으나, 그 이후 수사기관과 원심 법정에서 피고인이 자신에게 투자금을 이미 상환한 것으로 진술해 달라고 부탁하였다면서 사실은 피고인이 피해자에게 위 투자금을 상환하는 것을 본 사실은 없다고 진술하였다. ① 피고인은 피해자로부터 투자받은 위 5,000만 원 중 절반 정도는 피해자에게 이야기한 용도 외로 사용하였다. 12 피고인과 피해자 사이에 위 5,000만 원의 투자 외에도 몇 차례의 금전거래가 추가로 있었던 것으로 보인다. ③ 피고인이 피해자의 주거지에 방문하였을 때 청바지를 착용하고 있었는데, 피해자의 손톱 2개 밑에서 청바지의 섬유조직과 유사한 섬유조직이 발견되기도 하였다. ④ 피해자는 금전문제에 있어서는 성격이 철두철미하였고 딸인 D과 생활비 문제로 다투기도 하는 등 피고인과 피해자 사이에 투자금 및 수익금 문제로 다툼이 있었을 가능성이 있다.

B. In light of the following circumstances, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to 18 years of imprisonment.

On the other hand, it was hard to find out the cause of death until the result of autopsy was caused by the death of the accident. The victim and his bereaved family members of the victim did not make any effort to recover the damage, and their bereaved family members did not make any effort to recover the damage. On the other hand, it was considered that they were disadvantageous to the defendant. On the other hand, it was hard to find out the crime of cutting down the life, which is a value with dignity, and caused the crime to be stolen, and caused the death to be stolen.

3. Judgment on the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by the defendant

A. Relevant legal principles

In the case where the defendant denies the crime, it is not easy for the prosecutor to prove the crime completely by evidence. Furthermore, in the case where there is no direct evidence such as the witness of the crime or the DNA of the offender, etc., such as the criminal attempt taken by the witness of the crime, the fact that it is difficult for the defendant to prove the crime only by indirect facts by finding out the connection and the truth before and after the crime that the defendant knows or does not know, even though it is difficult to find the indirect facts.

In such a situation, the Supreme Court has held that a prosecutor may be held liable for conviction against the defendant to a certain extent as follows: (i) the judge’s conviction does not necessarily have to be formed by direct evidence, but is formed by indirect evidence insofar as it does not violate the empirical and logical rules. Even if indirect evidence does not have a complete probative value as to a crime individually, if a comprehensive examination of the entire evidence is conducted under mutual relation, it is deemed that there exists a comprehensive probative value that does not exist the sole evidence, then criminal facts can also be acknowledged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2014Do15909, Feb. 27, 201; 2001Do4392, Nov. 27, 201). However, in such a conviction, the judge’s conviction requires careful and indirect evidence to be determined by indirect evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do120754, Mar. 13, 2008).

In addition, the Supreme Court explains as follows with respect to a reasonable doubt. In other words, the degree of in-depth formation for finding a guilty in a criminal trial should be such a degree that there is no reasonable doubt, but to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence recognized as having probative value by causing a suspicion without reasonable grounds is not allowed beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. The term “reasonable doubt” in this context means not including any doubt and faith, but means a reasonable doubt as to the probability of a fact inconsistent with the facts that is inconsistent with the logical and empirical rule.

As such, suspicion based on conceptual or abstract possibility may not be deemed to be included in a reasonable doubt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do5407, Nov. 23, 2006).

(b) fact finding;

The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below.

1) Money relationship, etc. between the Defendant and the victim

A) The Defendant is divorced from the former wife, and there is one child between the former wife and the latter wife. The Defendant and D have no child on May 24, 2008. From February 2013 to February 2013, the Defendant and D resided together with the victim’s proposal, the mother of D, who had been in a long-term situation, residing in the apartment in the name of D, where the Defendant had been living together with the victim. The above apartment was leased KRW 50 million from the south of D, and the victim purchased money and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of D. The victim purchased the apartment of the victim, who resided in the time of his death, and purchased the apartment of KRW 193 million (on November 1, 2013, the remaining payment date) in November 2013.

B) On January 27, 2014, the Defendant discovered the victim’s death and was investigated by the police, and around May 2013, 2013, invested KRW 50 million from the victim and delivered KRW 3.6 million each month to the victim’s profits. The victim made a statement that he/she paid the above KRW 50 million at the time of directors around November 2013. At the time of the above statement, the Defendant invested KRW 21 million among KRW 50,000,000,000 in BA, and 29,000,000 won was invested in the Defendant’s three books and bags business. The Defendant consistently stated that he/she made an investment in the Defendant’s three hundred and sixty-one,00,000 won, and that he/she consistently made a statement to the Defendant’s business by adding it to his/her own convenience, other than the so-called “business that the above tax accounting business and the trademark attached to him/her.”

C) After being investigated by the police on February 2, 2014, D made a statement similar to that of the Defendant’s above statement, while the Defendant made a statement that it is difficult to give more profits, and if D’s defect, D made a statement that the Defendant was aware that the Defendant was aware that all of the investments was returned at two times. D was investigated on February 19, 2014, the date of emergency arrest of the Defendant, but it did not appear from “the victim,” but did not appear from “the victim did not know that the Defendant was able to pay money prior to moving into the current residence,” and it was stated from the Defendant that “the Defendant was aware that the Defendant was able to arrange Kim Gba and paid all the investments.”

In addition, D was investigated by the police on February 21, 2014, and even though the defendant did not have to give 50 million won to the victim, it was stated by the defendant at the request of the defendant that made the statement that there was the above enemy, and the previous statement has been reversed, and D continues to maintain its original statement as above. The defendant is the position that D would not know the reason for the reversal of the statement as above.3) On the other hand, D made a statement at the investigation stage as follows. In other words, D himself did not have a main book at Kim Jong-ba that the defendant operates, and did not receive living expenses from the defendant, but it was considered that the defendant was aware of his funeral. The defendant created a passbook in the name of the victim with the degree of KRW 83 million around 2009, and made a deposit of KRW 50 million in the name of the victim, and he did not return the money to the defendant that he did not have any relation with the victim.

D) The family register of the victim discovered in the U.S. where the victim's residence was located in the U.S., appears to the purport that the defendant invested KRW 50 million in May 2013 and received KRW 3.6 million in the monthly salary. On June 25, 201, the monthly salary of KRW 3.6 million (3 million in the amount of the defendant), KRW 3.6 million in the amount of August 23, 200 (3 million in the amount of the defendant), KRW 2.6 million in the amount of KRW 5 million in the amount of the victim's household, KRW 2.3 million in the amount of the victim's household, KRW 1.5 million in the amount of the victim's household, KRW 2.3 million in the amount of the victim's household, KRW 2.5 million in the amount of the 3 million in the amount of the 3.5 million in the amount of the 2.5 million in the amount of the 1.5 million in the amount of the defendant's household.

The main features discovered as above are as follows: (a) the details of revenue and expenditure are to be stated to the extent that the victim’s daily traffic cost is to be stated up to 10,000 won; (b) the first 3.6 million won of the revenue on August 23, 2013; (c) the amount of the Defendant’s revenue and expenditure KRW 3.6 million of the revenue on August 23, 2013; (d) the amount of the Defendant’s revenue and expenditure on September 3, 200; (e) the amount of the Defendant’s revenue and expenditure on September 10, 200 on September 23, 200; (e) the amount of KRW 23 million of the Defendant’s monthly revenue on October 24; and (e) the expenses of KRW 120,120,000 of the Defendant’s revenue on November 16; and (v) the first 95th of December on December 5, 2012; and

E) From the Defendant’s account, the settlement details related to the Internet game, such as NEM games, occur. On March 2013, the settlement amount reaches approximately KRW 500,000,000,000 has been settled in several other months. In addition, the Defendant transferred a considerable amount of money from June 2013 to BB, which is an Internet game business entity, to the Defendant. On the other hand, the police deemed that the remittance amount exceeds KRW 50,000,000,000,000 over 110 times, but the Defendant stated in the investigation process that BB transferred the remittance amount to KRW 30,00,000,000,000 from KRW 132,20,000,000,000 from KRW 20,000,000 from KRW 20,000 from KRW 112,00,000 from KRW 7,00,000).

바) 피해자의 계좌를 본다. ① 진접새마을금고에는 2007. 10. 9. 개설된 계좌에 13,921,956원(만기 2014. 1. 13.), 2013. 2. 14. 개설된 계좌에 2,000만 원(만기 2014. 2. 14.), 2013. 10. 23. 개설된 계좌에 3,000만 원(만기 2014. 1. 23.) 등 2014. 2. 13. 기준으로 합계 63,938,818원의 잔액이 남아 있다11). ㉡ 구리농협 새터지점 계좌(BL, 2013. 11. 20. 신규)에는 2014. 1. 9. 3,821,400원이 입금되어 같은 달 10일 10만 원, 같은 달 13일 60만 원이 인출된 후 약 400여만 원의 잔액이 남아 있다12). ⓒ 진천농협 양지지 점의 여러 계좌에서, 2013. 9. 10. 3,000만 원(계좌번호 BM), 1,000만 원(계좌번호 BN), 1억 6,000만 원(계좌번호 BO)이 입금되었다가 같은 해 11. 12. 각 그 원리금이 각 인출되었다 13). 1 홍천농협 북방지점 계좌(BP)에는 관리비 등 제세공과금 지출내역이 나타난다14). ① 위 지점의 다른 계좌(BQ)에는 2012년 6월 이래 약 5,000만 원 가까운 마이너스 대출금이 유지되다가 2013. 7. 17.경 4,300만 원이 전세금 명목으로 입금된 다음, 같은 날 및 그 다음날 합계 4,700만 원이 피해자의 장남인 H의 계좌로 이체된 후 H으로부터 같은 해 8월 25일 40만 원, 9월 25일 90만 원이 입금된 이래 다시 약 5,000만 원의 마이너스 대출금이 남아 있는 것으로 나타난다15). ① 농협은행 의정부시 지부 계좌(BR)에는, 2012. 7. 2. 대출받은 7,000만 원이 2013. 9. 2. 상환된 것으로 나타나고 16), 위 지부의 다른 계좌(BS)에는, 월세 입출금 내역이 나타난다 17). 사) 피해자의 경제사정 등에 관한 G의 진술은 다음과 같다. 즉, G 자신은 피해자와 8년 전부터 알고 지냈고, 피해자의 아파트에서 피해자와 성관계도 했던 에인 사이이다. G 자신은 배우자가 있어 피해자가 처음에는 꺼려했으나, 피해자가 자주 가는 콜라텍에서 함께할 마땅한 파트너가 없자 자신과 가까이 지냈다. 피해자로부터, '피고인 이 돈을 많이 가져다 쓰면서 이자도 제대로 주지 않고, 두 번째 돈을 가져갈 때는 D에게 말하지 말라고 부탁했다'는 말도 들었다. 또한 피해자로부터, 피해자가 피고인으로부터 이자를 100만 원 정도만 받고 그 이후에 받지 못하였고, 구정을 보내기 위해 구정 전에 이자를 달라고 피고인에게 얘기했다는 말도 들었다.18), 피해자가 이자 때문에 속상해 한다는 말은 피해자로부터 들었지만, 피해자가 피고인과 다툰다는 말은 듣지 못했다. 피해자는 2014. 1. 23. 16:20경까지 G 자신과 콜라텍에서 놀다가, 누군가를 만나야 한다고 해서 피해자의 아파트까지 태워다 주었다는 것이다.

2) The Defendant and the victim’s personal records, etc. around the time of committing the crime charged

A) The Defendant consistently made a statement about the time when the victim was the victim at the time of committing the crime indicated in the facts charged with the following contents. That is, the Defendant sought the victim on January 23, 2014 according to the insurance policy and the victim’s speech that she would bring under the bottom. When the Defendant divided the victim’s first class of apartment house, she was she was she was able to she was ever she was ever she was ever she was shed, she was she was shed, she was she was shed, she was shed, she was shed and opened a door. When the victim was she was shed, she was she was able to ever she was she was shed with the victim at the time of the Defendant’s birth, and she was she was she was she was she was she was she was she was she was she about about the first floor of the elevator, and the victim was she was she was her.

B) On January 23, 2014, the CCTV images of the victim’s apartment building, the elevator, the frontline of the building, and the CCTV images of the elevator are marked as follows around the time of crime indicated in the instant facts charged.

Around 17:20:11, the defendant prepares for boarding in front of the elevator of the first floor of the apartment building of the victim. In this case, the defendant saw the shopping bags that are papered, and put the bags on the shoulder.

17:20:43 The defendant is on board the elevator. The defendant is on board the elevator at around 17:21:16, from the 12th floor of the apartment building of the victim. The defendant is on board the elevator of the above 12th floor and is on personnel who has an open elevator door out of the elevator, around 19:26:22. The defendant is on board the elevator of the above 12th floor. The defendant is on mobile phone in the elevator while the elevator is under command.

around 19:27:00 the defendant starts to operate his mobile phone in the elevator. At around 19:27:06, the defendant, at around 19:27:06, when the elevator arrives in the first floor, dance shes the mobile phone at you. At around 19:27:08, the defendant stops from the first floor elevator. The defendant continues to return his/her mobile phone until the elevator arrives in the entrance.

At around 19:27:10, the defendant puts the above apartment building. Even if the defendant entered the apartment of the victim, he saw the shopping bags that have become a paper, and puts the bags on the shoulder.

As seen in the above paragraph 3) with regard to the time taken from CCTV inside the elevator above, the police, which was called by G on January 24, 2014, conducted the investigation by ascertaining that the time taken on CCTV was about 13 minutes earlier between the time taken on the CCTV image and the time taken on the CCTV image, and that the police conducted the investigation by comparing the time taken on the CCTV between January 29, 2014 and February 24 of the same year, the police conducted the investigation by comparing the time taken on the CCTV image and the actual time taken on the CCTV at least 13 minutes later. Furthermore, the police conducted the investigation by comparing the aforementioned CCTV between January 29, 2014 and the time taken on the CCTV at least 16 minutes earlier, 14 minutes earlier, 25 minutes earlier, 14 minutes earlier, 31 minutes earlier, 26 minutes earlier, 14 minutes earlier, 214 minutes earlier, 25 minutes earlier, 14 minutes earlier, 25 minutes earlier.

At around 17:07:00, the defendant drops from the 12th floor of the apartment building of the victim. At around 19:12:06, the defendant gets on board the elevator of the 12th floor above. The defendant 19:12:50 mobile phones at around 19:12:50. The defendant drops from the elevator of the first floor around 19:12:52.

C) We examine the Defendant’s response to communication confirmation data regarding the Defendant’s mobile phone calls at the time of the crime indicated in the instant facts charged (hereinafter referred to as “communication confirmation inquiry”) etc.

At around 18:36:29, the Defendant calls the phone from D to around 18:37:05 (A according to D’s statement, the Defendant and D’s contents of the said phone from D were to ask D whether the Defendant would come to the victim’s home, whether D’s work would end at several times, and whether D would come to the Defendant’s home, and “D would come to her home.” Although D has no accurate memory, the Defendant made a statement that he would come to her speech as above. At around 19:08:49, the Defendant appears to have come to talked with the victim from around 19:09:31.

On January 23, 2014, the victim's cell phone and general telephone (BT2) were sent and received as follows around the time indicated in the facts charged of this case. At around 16:45, the following calls were sent and received from 16:45 'BU' to 'BU' (BV, 'BU') and 1:36 'BU'. According to BU, the victim and 23:0 'BU' did not go to her own line of BU for drinking as of the next day. 23:47 'WB', which was stored in 16:51 'BU' and 16:56 'BU', which was stored from 16:5 'BU' and 16:56 'BU', but the victim did not go to 1.7 '5 'BU'.

around 18:31 Does a telephone to T.T.

There is no call from "U" at about 18:45.

In 18:46, 'U', 'C'. At around 19:08, the phone calls from the defendant's cell phone and about 40 seconds.

3) The criminal defendant and the victim's personal records after the time of committing the crime indicated in the facts charged

A) After getting out of the victim’s apartment, the Defendant made a statement as follows with respect to the Defendant’s criminal administration. The victim’s apartment gets out of the victim’s apartment house and returned to the house of the son, and returned to the house of the son, and the Defendant again becomes a CB apartment in Yang-si, Nam-si, which bears the obligation equivalent to KRW 26 million against the Defendant. However, the above CB apartment gets out of the house, and the Defendant did not go through several calls, and the Defendant was waiting for one time, and the Defendant returned to one time. The Defendant got out of the house of the victim’s house. The Defendant got out of the house of the victim’s house, which was called “the head of the Defendant’s business” and “the head of the Dong’s business handling the Defendant’s goods,” but D was dissatisfied with the “the head of the ordinary Defendant’s business” or “the head of the Gu’s business, and then returned to the house again, the Defendant made a statement to the Defendant’s new product and the new product.

B) According to CCTV images installed in the Defendant’s residence, at around 19:42:48, the Defendant’s entry into an apartment building at around 19:46:15, covered by a door to the right shoulder, and filled by a shopping white on the left hand. There is no difference between the Defendant’s entry and the shopping white. At around 22:04:20, the Defendant still puts shopping white at the time of returning home at around 22:0, while the shopping white appears to be somewhat unfasible.

According to the result of analyzing the mobile phone of the defendant and the communication confirmation inquiry, the defendant does not show the phone of V at the time the defendant asserts.

C) The Defendant made a statement as follows with regard to the following: (a) on January 21, 2014, the Defendant 201: (b) 'Npha', which the Defendant was suffering in order to see her kind of drinking and drinking in toilets at night; (c) 'Npha' was cut off on the floor; and (d) the Defendant her blood ties were laid off. However, on January 23, 2014, the Defendant her was laundry and her laundry to remove garbage after having her smelled, and her was laundry and her laundry to remove garbage. However, on the following day, the Defendant her laundry and her laundry was found to have been removed from the laundry before her was removed from the laundry, and the Defendant still left the laundry on the laundry and her laundry on the laundry.

In other words, at the court below and the court below, J, the owner of a laundry, made a statement as follows. In other words, at the time of receiving a launda from the Defendant, or at the time of returning back, it could not be confirmed whether the clothes were flaunded with a laund, and thus, it could not be confirmed. The defendant's memory was not certain in the same way when he takes charge of the laundry, but the original laund was not caused by the original laund. There was no laundry before the construction of the laundry, but there was no provision that the defendant found the laundry, and there was no provision that there was no garbage remaining after the defendant found the laundry.

On the other hand, according to the D's statement, even though the Defendant appeared to 'Npha' in 'Npha' due to 'Npha' and 'Npha' on the day or following day, he did not do so to 'Npha', she did not do so at the night on the day of committing the crime as stated in the facts charged, and she friened the process of taking garbage as above. 25)

D) On January 24, 2014, the Defendant received medical treatment at the “CC Hospital near the residential area”, and the police confirmed the hospital as follows. In other words, the Defendant complained of a water surface disorder for the last one month, the head of which was frighten, and the back and fright of which was frighten, and the head was frighten, and the Defendant showed a symptoms that the face was hick and red light was maintained. The Defendant conducted an internal test to diagnose the normal marcation;

E) According to D’s statement, the victim’s nature is well-known with the surrounding people, is well-known, friendly, and friendly, and the outside person is frequently met. In addition, according to the above statement, the victim is not well-known, and the victim is in a clean character and knenee knes stand well-being. On the other hand, on January 23, 2014, there is no witness to the victim’s apartment at his own vicinity or at another place.

F) The victim’s cell phone was 08:41 on January 24, 2014, around 08:41, around 08:48, and around 10:26, the phone number (BX) stored in “BW” was three times from G, and thereafter, the victim did not receive the phone until the victim died, and the victim did not have the phone until the victim was discovered. Meanwhile, G reported to the police by deeming that the victim did not receive several calls from the victim’s cell phone and general telephone, and that the victim reported it to the police. At this time, the police officer was suffering from the phone CD (the mobile phone CD) used in the elevator with the victim’s residence on January 24, 2014, and around 19:34:08, around 27 (CCTV) and around 19:314:31 on July 12, 2014.

G) After that, according to the Defendant’s statement on the Defendant’s criminal records, on January 24, 2014, the Defendant 28), while drinking D and eating D, the Defendant sent D and Dog to D, “I am at a small amount of lele or house located in CE on the TE,” and Dogg Dog 09:00 on the following day, I am at around 09:00. Around 10:00, I think that the Defendant’s promise with the victim was 10:00,000, and you did not receive the Defendant’s phone, and I am to D’s Dog Dog Dog 30, because you did not receive the Defendant’s phone. According to D’s statement on this part, I want to see that I am as Defendant Dog Dog Dog Dog d’.

4) Opinions, such as the situation at the time of discovery of the body of the victim, the autopsy, etc.

A) D was under contact with the victim’s friendship (the victim’s cell phone stored as “CF”, and this name appears to have been contacted by G) that it does not become a everer contact with the victim (CF appears to have been contacted by G), and entered the victim’s apartment around 14:30 on January 27, 2014. However, D, even by dividing the password (CH) and opening the locks, filed a report with the fire brigade around 14:49 on January 27, 2014, around 119, the 119 fire brigade entered the apartment of the victim’s apartment structure immediately adjacent to the victim’s apartment, and confirmed that the victim’s death was living, through the entrance of the victim, and the entrance of the victim could have been opened as a string.

B) The victim was found to have a small size of 6 parts of the victim’s residential area, her head, her head, and scamened. The victim was found to have 3cmened on the upper part of the victim’s head, her head, and scamened on the upper part of the victim’s 3cm. Meanwhile, according to the field identification records of the case, “the victim was unlikely to have scam off the upper part of the victim’s scam,” and the victim was found to have 6 parts of the victim’s scamened on the front part of the scamened, and the victim was found to have been 5 parts of the victim’s scamened, and the victim was not able to have scamened on the front part of the scamened, and the victim was 34 parts of the victim’s scamened and scamened on the front part of the scam.

D) As a result of D’s confirmation, the victim’s residence did not have any satisfy, and the victim’s 4,50,000 foot checks at par value 1,00,000, 90,000 foot 1,00,000 foot 9 were found in the victim’s inside and outside satisfy, and there were precious metals.

E) On January 27, 2014, the body autopsy prepared by the doctor YY stated the following as 'the presumption of death before 10 to 20 hours': (a) the body autopsy prepared by the victim was stated as 2: (b) clock in two government heats; (c) clock in the upper right line; (d) clock in the upper right line; (e) clock in the clock; (e) clock in the clock; (e) clock in the clock; (e) clock in the clock; (f) clock in the clock; (f) clock in the clock; (f) clock in the clock; (f) clock in the clock; (f) 3) clock in the clock; (f) clock in the clock; and (f) 3) 4) clock in the body of the victim.

F) The autopsy report prepared by AR by the autopsy of the CII University, which conducted the autopsy of the victim, is indicated as follows. ① The expansion of the victim is 156 cm, the weight of the victim is about 58 km, the body weight was confirmed by knee knee knee kne, and the body flaf was considerably formed on the back of the body.

㉡ 머리 오른쪽 마루 부위 뒤쪽에 2.5cm 정도의 찢긴 상처와 3 x 1.5cm 정도의 피부 까짐이, 오른 쪽 마루 부위에서는 국소적으로 형성된 피부까짐이 보인다. 머리덮개 밑연조직층에서 점출혈 등이 보이고, 뇌혈관에서 30% 미만 경도의 동맥경화를 보이나, 뇌실질 뇌막에서 특기할 점은 보이지 않고, 머리뼈 골절 손상도 보이지 않는다. ㉢ 얼굴 부위에서 울혈, 양쪽 눈꺼풀의 결막, 입안 점막, 얼굴 피부에서 다수 점 출혈, 오른 쪽 볼 부위에서 1cm 정도의 선모양의 피부까짐이 보인다. 양쪽 볼 부위, 아래턱 오른쪽 연조직층에서 출혈, 오른쪽 깨물근에서 출혈이 보인다. ② 오른쪽 턱 밑 삼각에서 2.5 x 1.5cm 및 1.5 x 1cm 정도의 피부까짐이, 목 앞쪽에서 불규칙한 형태의 피부내출혈 및 국소적으로 형성된 피부까짐이 보인다. ① 몸통에서 특기할만한 손상은 보이지 않고, 왼쪽 세 번째 손가락 끝마디 등쪽에서 국소적으로 형성된 0.7cm 정도의 낮게 찢긴 상처와 오른쪽 손등 부위에서 국소적으로 형성된 피부 밑 출혈이 보인다. 오른쪽 팔 아래 부위 뒤쪽 연조직에서 국소적 출혈, 오른 쪽 종아리 알 연조직층에서 반상의 출혈을 보이는 외에는 다리에서 특기할 손상은 보이지 않는다. ☞ 양쪽 턱 밑 삼각, 오른쪽 아래턱각 연조직층에서 출혈, 목 앞쪽 연조직층에서 미약하게 형성된 출혈, 입안 바닥 근육층에서 국소적으로 형성된 출혈, 왼쪽 빗장목뿔근 아래 주변 연조직층에서 출혈, 오른쪽 빗장목뿔근 위쪽에서 출혈, 양쪽 방패목뿔근에서 출혈, 갑상샘 오른옆 주변 연조직층에서 출혈, 갑사연골 앞쪽에서 출혈, 양쪽 빗장뼈에서 골막연조직 출혈, 긴목근 아래쪽에서 출혈, 목뼈 앞쪽과 식도 뒤쪽 연조직층 여러 곳에서 출혈, 혀근육에서 출혈, 방패연골 오른위 뿔과 오른아래 뿔에서 골절 및 출혈을 보이고, 기도 점막에서 다수의 출혈을 보인다. 이 피해자의 혈액이나 위 등에서 독극물은 검출되지 않았고, 혈중 알콜 농도는 0.01% 미만이며, 위에서 감, 쌀밥알, 콩조각, 키위, 배추, 토마토 등이 식별되었다. ○ 위와 같은 검사결과를 토대로 부검의는, 피해자 머리의 찢긴 상처가 국소적 외력이 작용하여 생긴 것으로 보는 한편, 최종적 사인을 목부위에 외력이 작용한 경부압박질식사로 보았다. 위 부검의는 당심에서, 액사의 경우에도 손톱자국이 없는 경우가 많아 손톱자국 여부로 액사 여부를 판단할 수 없고, 피해자의 경우도 그 외력을 반드시 손으로 단정할 수가 없으며, 목에 난 출혈부위를 볼 때 피해자가 넘어지면서 어딘가에 목을 부딪친 것으로 보기도 어렵고, 개인차가 있어 시반을 가지고 사망시간을 추정하기는 어렵다고 진술하였다.

G) As a result of the appraisal by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation for Textiles discovered in each one of the two saws of the victims as having the same system as Cheongba and Malis’ fibers.

아) 한편, 법의학서적41)에 의하면, 시체의 변화에 의한 추정 중 시강(屍剛)에 관하여 다음과 같이 기재되어 있다.

① 30 minutes in the heart and the breadth, ② 1-2 hours in the diameter of the runway, ③ 6-8 hours in the transition, ④ 5-6 hours in the transition, ⑤ 12 hours in the transition and the breadth, ⑤ 12-15 hours in the heart and the breadth.

5) Conduct, etc. of investigation

A) At the first time, the police conducted an investigation to presume the victim's cryp death by taking the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the cryp to the

B) While emergency arrest of the Defendant on January 1, 2014, the Defendant was found in the Cream and shopping bags in the Defendant’s residence, clothes, and Luxembourg, and the Defendant’s residential floor plan (No. 33, the Defendant was found to have been in order to explain the situation when the victim was discovered at the meeting after the Defendant’s funeral was completed) of the victim’s neighborhood. The police searched the Defendant’s vehicle from the victim’s apartment on January 23, 2014, which was driven by the Defendant when her return to the victim’s apartment and she was found to have been in the Defendant’s residence. However, there was no article seized.

C) Although there was no detailed content that could be peculiar to the data, such as able to be submitted by the Defendant at will, the Defendant’s cell phone calls were entirely deleted on January 27, 2014, and the phone number book was entirely deleted, and the me and the message book were partially deleted. As a result of the analysis, the time when the Defendant deleted as above was discovered, the time when the body of the victim was discovered, and the call was examined by the police. Meanwhile, the call record was restored from January 21, 2014 to around 20:23:18:24 of the same month, but the call record was not restored, and the call record was connected to the Defendant’s cell phone’s Internet access site during the week. However, there were no particular facts related to the instant charges.

D) Although the Defendant voluntarily presented the clothes of the Defendant and the clothes of the victim that was seized, there were no special issues regarding the facts charged of the instant case.

E) The fact that the victim received four keyss of the assistant strings when he/she purchases the present apartment and receives the keys was confirmed. The police conducted a search and investigation into the victim’s key to the apartment string, but it was not confirmed that the key of the victim’s apartment strings was additionally reproduced. The victim’s apartment strings are all four keys, and three of them are combined with the string strings, and the rest is separated into three, and one of them is used, unlike the other two.

F) Meanwhile, the Defendant discarded two cellphones at night on the date the body of the victim was discovered. In light of the relevant legal principles as seen earlier, the following circumstances can be seen.

1) A private person of the victim appears to have died at the scene where the victim was discovered after the victim died of the probability of salvance. The victim was knee and knee, who was fele and not fixed, due to the cause of the knee, etc. of the victim's knee. However, according to the victim's statement at the trial of the autopsy that the private person revealed as a result of the autopsy against the victim was light pressure, and that the possibility of the victim's kneblidine facing the victim was low, the possibility of the victim's death at the above accident seems to be low. In addition, in light of on-site photographs, the victim's external ability of death was not found in the surrounding area, such as the result of autopsy, and the victim's clothes or the victim's attitude at the time of the discovery was likely to have been beyond the victim's own external ability, as seen above, in light of the victim's attitude or the victim's attitude at the time of the discovery.

Furthermore, the victim seems to have been deprived of her head when she was flick and her head in the upper half of the vessel. At least the victim's fingerprints should have been her faceed, and the victim's fingerprint should have been her faceed. At least the victim's fingerprints over the right side, not the front but the right side of the front. Furthermore, according to the result of the autopsy, the victim's head head head is only her upper part of the upper part of the blood, and the victim's head is not only a natural person but also a direct private person. If the victim was faced with her head above the bottom, the victim did not immediately die, and the victim's head is likely to have been deprived of her head or to her head during the process of her hairing, and the victim's her head is likely to have been deprived of the victim's her head, so the victim's her head cannot be found to have been deprived of the victim's her head's s/ her head in the following way.

On the other hand, the possibility of robbery is low, and there is a high possibility of corrosioning, considering the fact that cash or precious metal remains in the apartment of the victim, the assistant is diving, and the body of the victim is rarely shaken.

2) The possibility of the victim’s death during the criminal time stated in the instant facts charged

A) The time of crime indicated in the facts charged (from January 23, 2014 to 19:11, 201) is based on the fact that the victim was killed by the defendant at the time when the defendant died after the female and was found. Since the defendant was dead from 08:41 on the day following the female to the time when he was discovered, the victim was killed by the defendant.

B) In this regard, the autopsy cannot be deemed to have conducted an estimate of the time of death, and the autopsy stated that the time for presumption of death was 10 to 20 hours in the autopsy, and that it was 'the presumption of death before 10 to 20 hours' in the autopsy, and that the description was 'the condition after the body was cut down' as to the reasons stated in the medical book. According to the legal book, the death occurred when the death occurs, and the death occurred, and the death occurred when 12 to 15 hours occur after the death, and the body was 'the time when the body was laid down'. Thus, it is difficult to view that it is presumed that the death was presumed that the death was 10 to 20 hours after the discovery as mentioned above, and that the possibility of death was entirely excluded, namely, the meaning that the body had been cut off and the possibility that the death had been died before that time.

C) Meanwhile, according to the statement of the death in the trial at the court, if the death was satisfy by the victim, it is likely that the body of the victim would be recorded in the death examination if the victim satisfyed, and the body of the victim would not be the body of three to four days. If the body of the victim satisfy three to four days before the discovery date, it would be "from January 23, 2014 to January 15:10 to January 24, 2014" and there is a possibility that the victim would die at the time of the crime as stated in the facts charged. However, even if the above statement of the death in the trial at the court of the defendant, it is premised on the incorrectness of the death, and even according to the defendant's statement at the court of the trial, it is sufficient that the victim would have satisfyed the body of the victim, and thus, the possibility of the victim's death cannot be ruled out in the crime of this case solely on the presumption of the above facts charged.

D) Furthermore, there is little possibility that the victim would continue to exist after the date and time of the crime indicated in the facts charged in the instant case, since no telephone was made to anyone, or no telephone was received from anyone (as seen below only the telephone content of the Defendant as seen below), and no witness was given to anyone.

3) Unclaimed monetary relationship between the Defendant and the victim

A) As to the part on which the Defendant fully repaid the amount of KRW 50 million as stated in the facts charged, around November 2013, the part on which the Defendant made a statement consistent with the above Defendant’s statement and reversed the previous statement upon the Defendant’s request. There is no content that the above investment amount was fully paid to the victim’s family division or meri, who is a part of preparing the details of revenue and expenditure, in full. Even on January 2, 2014, the Defendant paid to the victim KRW 3.6 million as the monthly promise to pay the above investment amount of KRW 50 million, and the victim’s family division also received KRW 3.6 million from the Defendant. Although the Defendant paid the investment amount of KRW 50 million to the victim, it is difficult for the Defendant to believe that it was difficult for the Defendant to return the remaining amount of money to the victim’s account as stated in the above Defendant’s business account. However, it is difficult for the Defendant to believe that the Defendant’s remaining amount of money was returned to the victim’s account.

B) On September 3, 2013, the additional investment capital of KRW 26 million, and KRW 23 million, which is 200,000,000,000,000,000,000. In an investigation agency, the defendant responded to the following question whether the above amount is not additionally invested by the victim based on the victim's family father and mergator. Upon detention in 2009, the defendant's 50,000,000 won was 40,000,000 won and 60,000 won were 60,000,000 won and 60,000 won were 60,000 won and 60,000 won were 60,000 won and 60,000,000 won were 60,000 won and 60,000 won were 60,000,00 won were 60,00 won.

C) The Defendant does not present particular data on the source of money, etc. that he/she had given to the victim on the ground of his/her own business, called a “social officer or employee”. D also has no visits to the victim’s business place, and thus, economic activities of the Defendant are in fact on Vietnam. Furthermore, the Defendant consumed a large amount of money (in investigative agency, KRW 30 million, KRW 13.2 million, and KRW 15 million in the account of the Defendant’s account, and KRW 15 million in the account of the Defendant’s account) on the Internet game. Moreover, even if the Defendant’s account was deposited and withdrawn from time to time, it seems that there was no possibility that the Defendant would have received money from D and paid money, or used money from 20,000,000,000 won, which is more than 5,000 won, and there was no possibility of conflict between the victim and 20,000 won, which is the victim’s money and 35,000,000.

4) Possibility of the Defendant’s false statement regarding the telephone time with the victim

가) 피고인은 피해자의 아파트에서 나와 엘리베이터가 1층에 도착한 후 피해자와 통화하였다고 진술하고 있고, 검사는 엘리베이터 CCTV 영상에 찍힌 시각을 14분 16초 정도 보정하면 피고인이 피해자와 함께 있을 때 피고인이 피해자와 통화한 것처럼 가장하고 마치 엘리베이터에서 내린 후 통화한 것처럼 꾸몄다며 피고인의 주장을 반박한다. 만일 피고인의 주장이 타당하다면 피고인은 결정적인 알리바이를 가지게 되고, 검사의 주장이 타당하다면 피고인은 범인이 아니라면 굳이 할 필요가 없는 행동을 한 결과가 된다.

B) On January 23, 2014, the Defendant 17:21: around 16, 2014, at the 12nd elevator with the victim's apartment, and the Defendant started telephone conversations with the victim at around 19:27:06, when the Defendant visited the victim's house, at the 10th floor of the elevator: 1:6: The Defendant appears to have come from the victim's first 4th floor of the elevator at the 10th floor and the 19:26th floor of the elevator at the 19:0 first 4th floor of the elevator: The Defendant appears to have come from the victim's first 1:6th floor of the elevator at the 10th floor of the victim's first : The Defendant's first 1:6th 7th 1:6th 7th 7th 2014 : 2nd 1:6th 7th 7th 2014.

C) However, even if the time when it is confirmed that the Defendant and the victim exchanged at a communication confirmation meeting is 19:08:49 on January 23, 2014, to 19:09:0,000, the Defendant and the victim’s above phone was 3 minutes prior to boarding or leaving an elevator, and the Defendant’s statement on this part seems to have been false. Meanwhile, the investigation agency’s measurement of the error in CCTV image on January 29, 2014 was 14:16 seconds on the premise that the error in CCTV image on January 29, 2014 was 2:14 minutes from 23:0 to 3:0 seconds from 29:0 seconds of the Defendant’s view that there was no possibility that the error in CCTV image time was 14:16 seconds from 29:0 on January 23, 2014, on the premise that it was 14 to 29:3 minutes from the first time to 24:14:20 seconds of the apartment.

D) Furthermore, according to the Defendant’s statement, the Defendant’s statement stated that “I am fying with the victim’s speech,” called “I am fying with D time.” According to D’s statement, the Defendant was originally placed at the victim’s home, and even if I am at the hospital, there was a fying of badly bad conditions since I am going to go through the Defendant’s completion of preparation from August of Saturdays, and I am fying with children. However, considering the Defendant’s Saturday schedule, even if I am fying with children at the Defendant’s center or house, I am fying with D after I am am with the Defendant’s wife, but there was no possibility that the Defendant had agreed with the victim, and there was no possibility that the Defendant could have made the Defendant visit the victim, and there was no possibility that it might be delayed to find out some time after the Defendant’s visit to commit the crime.

5) Although the traced victim found under the part of the victim's saws did not seem to have actively resisted the victim's saws, there has been damages that can be seen as scams at the end of the victim's saws or kacks, which also led to the appraisal that it is the same system as Cheongbow's fibers at the bottom of the two saws. According to D's testimony, the victim was 54), at the time of the death of the victim, was in a state of Cheongbow at the time of the death of the victim, and was in a state of Cheongbow at the time of the victim's laundry, there was no possibility that the fiber body under the part of the victim's saws would be the fiber body of the victim's Cheongbow at the time of the crime. In addition, it was possible that the victim was able to scam out the victim's saw in the process of the crime, and that it was under the part of the victim's saw.

6) Other activities conferred upon the defendant.

A) If the Defendant, when leaving the victim’s apartment house, tried to make a son’s horse, he would not shut down the elevator door, and she would have her franked with the elevator, and then she would have fling off the elevator and contacted with the mobile phone. Even in the case of CCTV images, the Defendant was in the form of personnel management outside the door, but it seems that she would have been frying from outside the door that she would make a speech. Rather, it is difficult to see that the Defendant applied for the elevator door for about 10 years, while taking the elevator door, it is difficult to see that it is an attitude that does not differ from that of the Defendant’s assertion.

B) The Defendant, who returned from the victim’s apartment house to the apartment of the Defendant, brought back without having to go in the house of the victim. Even according to the Defendant’s statement, the reason why the Defendant found the house of brub V at night without any contact is that he received money from V in advance, and the Defendant calls to V several times on the apartment of V without contact. However, in light of the fact that the phone details are not left in the communication record, it is difficult to believe the Defendant’s above statement, and further, the Defendant found V in the lower court’s statement to change the statement for “a description on the new product of this case he left in the car”.

C) According to D’s statement, the reflect that the Defendant was receiving from the victim was smaller than that of the victim’s reputation and that the Defendant was less than that of the transferor’s reputation. In addition, the Defendant did not understand that the Defendant, as soon as possible, returned to the apartment of the victim of ordinary peace, and promoted D again to the apartment of the victim of the instant facts charged, it does not well understand that the date of the crime indicated in the instant facts charged, alone, was two hours or with the victim.

D) The Defendant’s daily life, i.e., her clothes, her clothes, sent to the victim apartment, and tried to go to laundry, or left laundry again to laundry by getting out of laundry before the first day of the crime indicated in the facts charged in the instant case, which was the previous framework, does not seem to be inevitable even considering the Defendant’s various arguments. The fact that the Defendant did not match the Defendant’s statement with the owner of the laundry and the Defendant’s statement regarding the state of the laundry at the time when the laundry was assigned to laundry, and the laundry still remains in a laundry which has not yet been built. According to the Defendant’s statement, the Defendant’s external gift received from the victim was put out as laundry, but it seems that there was no reason for laundry to find out the laundry.

E) According to the Defendant’s statement, at night on January 23, 2014, he/she found a nearby hospital on the following day for making a promise at night and on the night, but 58) The details confirmed by the investigation agency atCC Hospital, which is its neighboring hospital, are merely that the Defendant’s surface disorder or head is heavy, and that the investigation agency conducted a border border at the time of the extension of the house, and there is no content related to the blood transfusion or the internal border. However, even though the confirmation is merely a part of the fact-finding, the Defendant’s major disease that the Defendant complained of it on the preceding day is ideal.

F) The Defendant discovered the body of the victim, deleted all the details of the Defendant’s cell phone call immediately before the police was examined, and discarded two cellphones at night, and the Defendant acted as above, but there is no explanation that the Defendant, as seen above, he was found to act as a representative or a manager of the victim’s body or a manager of the victim’s body, and even if he did not have the proviso of the investigation, if the Defendant is irrelevant to the victim’s death, he would not be well aware that he did the above act that may be caused to murder. In addition, even if the police police knew the location of the Defendant when he found the assistant of the victim’s apartment, it is one of the questions raised against the Defendant during the investigation process.

7) In light of the fact that there is no strong trace of the victim’s strong resistance to the possibility of committing the crime by a third party, and that cash was in the house, as seen earlier, the offender appears to be a face-to-face offender. In addition, if the offender is aware that the victim was killed by a face-to-face offender and his assistant material chain, it would be the most doubtful person if the victim was aware that he was killed by a face-to-face offender. In light of the fact that the victim’s surrounding figures stated that the victim was aware that he was aware of the victim’s personal relationship with the victim, and that the victim was not well aware of the relationship with G, G would be a criminal unless the defendant was found. In fact, G is likely to be aware of the victim’s phone number on the day following the day on which the crime stated in the facts charged in the instant case was committed, it is difficult to find out the victim’s apartment site that did not change the victim’s seat at the scene, and later, it is difficult to find out the victim’s motive, police officer’s lineal and oral entrance.

In addition, the defendant is doubtful of the CJ of the victim's apartment security guards. The CJ, which had no awareness of the victim's family members, has been a funeral door of the victim, and the victim sent the victim with close relation to the victim by requesting CJ to replace the main body of the apartment with the passwords, and there is a high possibility of knowing the password of the main body of the apartment. However, only the circumstance suspected of the defendant, it is difficult to view CJ to have killed the victim, and there is no particular material.

Ultimately, in the above circumstances, the victim's family register does not appear in the details of special monetary transactions with others other than the defendant's monetary relationship, or considering the victim's reputation, it is unlikely that the victim was killed by a third party other than the defendant.

(d) Recognition of guilt;

Comprehensively taking account of the above facts and circumstances, it may be acknowledged without any reasonable doubt that the Defendant committed a crime as stated in the instant facts charged in the following respect. Accordingly, the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles against another Defendant is rejected.

① The victim appears to have died by the external pressure of the victim in the course of committing the crime indicated in the facts charged. The possibility of being a person who was aware of the victim and the third party, not the defendant, is extremely high. In addition, the victim does not have any person who either gets the victim or contacted the victim at the time of committing the crime as indicated in the facts charged, and the victim is a prone suspect. However, according to the aforementioned circumstances, unlike the assertion of the defendant that the defendant had talked with the victim after getting out of the victim’s house, the victim is able to be sufficiently confirmed that the victim had talked with the victim during the victim’s house, and that the CCTV was started from the elevator of the first floor after being aware of CCTV to start the call with the victim. This was the most manipulating of the defendant by manipulating the victim, and if the defendant was not the criminal, it is not necessary to commit any act to commit the crime. Thus, the circumstance leading the defendant to be able to commit the crime.

③ In addition, following the time when the Defendant committed the crime as indicated in the facts charged, the following circumstances are sufficiently doubtful that the Defendant was a criminal. In other words, the Defendant: (a) went back to the victim’s house after having her own house and without having any reflector brought at the victim’s house; (b) contrary to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant’s statement was not found in the monetary record meeting; and (c) the Defendant’s statement is not consistent about the developments leading up to finding V.; and (d) the timing when the Defendant was laundry and the period when the Defendant was laundry and the period when the Defendant was laundry and the process of finding it again are left to the laundry; (b) it is difficult to evaluate the Defendant’s act as a natural act, such as the time when the Defendant was laundry or difficult to understand the Defendant’s statement in the nearby hospital after the date and time stated in the facts charged, considering the difference between the Defendant’s statement and the hospital’s medical record at the hospital; and (c) the Defendant’s statement is doubtfully doubtfuled on the date of the victim’s statement.

④ Even with regard to the motive for committing a crime by returning time, there are sufficient motives for the Defendant to commit a crime. That is, there are many parts of the Defendant’s statement with respect to monetary relations with the Defendant and the victim. In addition, it is difficult to accept the Defendant’s statement on the part that the Defendant repaid 50 million won invested by the victim twice, and as such, the Defendant demanded the Defendant’s statement as if he were to have repaid 50 million won through D. Moreover, it is difficult to believe that the Defendant’s statement was made as is, apart from the above KRW 50 million, twice, about the circumstances that the Defendant received 49 million from the victim. As such, the Defendant’s statement not only is clear about the issue of money with the victim of the murder incident, but also requests another person to make a false statement, and it is recognized that the Defendant’s statement was made by the victim, taking into account the possibility of having received sufficient monetary pressure with respect to the date and time of the instant charge consistent with the economic situation of the Defendant and the period when the Defendant paid investment profits to the victim.

⑤ 그 밖에 피고인이 주장하고 있는 사정에 관하여도 본다. ① 피고인이 지적하는 바와 같이 피고인이 피해자의 집 보조자물쇠의 열쇠를 평소 소지하고 다녔다는 점을 인정할 증거는 보이지 않는다. 피고인이 그 열쇠의 소재를 알고 있었다는 이유만으로 경찰이 추측하는 바와 같이, 공소사실 기재 범행 후 보조자물쇠 열쇠 1개로 보조자물 쇠를 잠그고 휴대하고 다니다가 피해자가 사망한 채 발견된 후 어수선한 틈을 타서 제자리에 두었을 것으로 보는 것은 그 현장상황에 비추어 다소 무리다. 만일 위 ②항과 같이 피고인을 범인으로 볼 수 있는 강력한 사정이 없다면, 피해자 집의 보조자물쇠가 잠겨 있는 사정도 피고인이 범인이 아닐 수 있다는 합리적 의심을 더하는 요소가 될 수 있다. 그러나 위 ②항과 같이 실패한 알리바이 조작 등 앞서 본 바와 같은 여러 사정으로 피고인이 범인이라는 점이 인정되는 이상, 범행을 부인하는 피고인만이 오로지 알 수 있는 사정이 설명되지 않는다는 이유가 이 사건 공소사실을 유죄로 인정함에 방해가 되지는 않는다. 한편 피고인은 당심 제4회 공판기일에서 피해자의 아파트의 주자 물쇠 비밀번호를 잘 알지 못하여 항상 피해자가 문을 열어 주었다고 진술한 바가 있으나, 피고인은 이 사건 공소사실 기재 범행일 전날인 2014. 1. 22. D의 심부름으로 피해자 아파트를 방문하여 초인종을 눌러도 응답이 없자, 피해자에게 전화를 걸어 피해자가 전화로 알려 준 비밀번호로 피해자의 아파트 문을 열고 들어가 고등어를 두고 나온 일이 있는 등59), 피고인과 피해자만이 알 수 있는 방법으로 피고인이 보조자물쇠의 열쇠를 복제하여 소지하였을 가능성이, 그나마 피고인을 제외한 제3자가 보조자물쇠의 열쇠를 복제하여 소지할 가능성보다 훨씬 많다. 피고인은 피해자의 아파트에서 발견된 보조자물쇠의 열쇠가 복제된 점이 없다는 열쇠업자들의 진술에 비추어, 자신이 복제된 열쇠를 소지할 가능성이 없다고 주장하나, 열쇠업자들의 진술은 피해자의 아파트에서, 발견된 보조자물쇠의 열쇠에서 복제의 흔적이 발견되지 않는다는 것이지 60), 즉 그 열쇠가 복제본이 아니라는 것이지 그 열쇠를 원본으로 한 복제본이 없다는 말은 아니므로 피고인의 위 주장은 받아들이기 어렵다. ○ 피고인은 만일 자신이 범인이라면 범행 중에 피해자의 딸인 D이 눈치 채지 못하게 통화하는 것이 불가능하였을 것이라는 취지로 주장하나, 앞서 본 여러 사정에 의하면, 피고인이 D과 통화한 시간은 범행 후 현장을 정리하는 과정이었을 가능성이 높은데, 이와 같이 피고인은 피해자를 살해하고도 사고사로 가장하고, 알리바이를 위해 존재하지도 않는 피해자에게 인사를 하는 모습까지 연출하였음을 알 수 있으므로, 피고인이 범행 후 현장을 정리하는 과정에서 D과 태연하게 통화한 바가 있더라도 공소사실을 유죄로 인정함에 방해가 되지 아니한다. ©

Although the Defendant asserted that he was in action by an investigative agency without carrying out a false horse detection device, the investigative agency tried to carry out a false horse detection device against the Defendant after the Defendant’s emergency arrest, and it is difficult to take accurate measurement at an uneasiness after detention. 61) In addition, according to the prosecutor’s opinion, the contents of the instant facts charged are somewhat general without specifying deadly weapons in the instant facts charged and without specifying the time of death. However, in light of the fact that the Defendant continued to carry shopping bags and bags when the victim’s apartment houses and carried them in person, and even after carrying them in person’s house without carrying them, it cannot be ruled out that it was possible to put the deadly weapon into shopping bags or bags, and even if it was sufficiently denied through other evidence, it does not interfere with the Defendant’s defense right to defense.

6. Ultimately, there is sufficient evidence to prove that the Defendant, as indicated in the instant facts charged, killed a victim while disputing a monetary problem, etc. with the victim, and fabricated a disguised albane as if he/she was in the currency with the living victim.

4. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of unreasonable sentencing

As cited by the court below, considering the following circumstances, considering the circumstances cited by the court below in light of the Defendant’s favorable to the Defendant, such as: (a) the circumstance that the Defendant did not have any particular criminal record; (b) the Defendant murdered the surviving mother; and (c) the Defendant denies the Defendant from committing an accident; and (d) the Defendant was exactly aware of the CCTV image time only when the Defendant was suspected of having been processed from the beginning; (b) it is difficult to deem that the Defendant was unable to have carried out an imminent plan for murdering the victim from the beginning; and (c) there is no evidence to acknowledge this; and (d) the instant crime appears to have been committed by the court below, it is difficult to deem that the punishment determined by the court below is unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed as it is without merit.

Judge Lee Jong-soo

The number of judges

(ii) evidence records 1146 pages

(iii) evidence records 1815 pages

4) Evidence records 512 to 517 pages

(v) evidence records 707 pages;

6) Evidence records 914 pages

7) Evidence records 1876 pages

8) The evidence records consisting of not more than 715 pages and of remittance fees.

(ix) evidence records 701 pages;

10) Evidence of no more than 650 pages, 702 pages

11) Evidence records are 932 pages, while there are no data supporting the contents of the deposit and withdrawal stated in the investigation report (Evidence Records 915, 916 pages).

12) Evidence records 577 pages

13) Evidence records 578, 579 pages and each of them appears to have been used as the remainder of the apartment house residing at the time of the victim’s death.

14) Evidence records no more than 580 pages

15) Evidence records are 588 pages, 20.7 million won deposited to H in four installments even around 2012.

16) Evidence records 597,598 pages

17) Evidence records no more than 590 pages

18) Evidence records 269 pages

19) Evidence records 1809 pages

20) Evidence records 559 pages

21) Evidence records 1734 pages

22) The telephone number is a communication line that is the same as the above numbers used by 'BY' following the change of communications operator following the number transfer to 'BY'.

23) Evidence records 408 pages

24) The trial records 276 pages

25) 138 pages of trial records, 1893 pages of evidence

26) Evidence records 822,823 pages

27) Evidence records 561 pages and 18 pages of the analysis report by the digital investigation office of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office

28) Evidence records 1811 pages

29) As a result of the victim’s telephone call analysis, the Defendant’s phone call time is about 10:19:17.

30) As a result of the victim’s telephone analysis, D’s phone call does not reveal the content of the victim around January 25, 2014.

31) Evidence records 1900 pages

32) Evidence records 409 pages

33) Evidence photographs and descriptions of 30 pages 29 of the evidence records

34) The 35 pages of the examination of testimony of the trial of the witness AR

35) Evidence of 21 pages 12 of the evidence records

36) Evidence of 24 pages 18 of the record

37) Evidence records No. 19 pages 7 photographs, Defendant also considered that the victim was able to see (Evidence Records No. 1070 pages).

38) The term “strokes of trees” means those which are strokes of trees by hand.

39) 사람이 죽은 후 몸에 생기는 반점을 말한다. 시반(屍斑)이라고도 한다.

40) It seems that the regional law-related office of the National Scientific Investigation Institute was concurrently held by the regional law-related office.

41) Attachment to the written opinion of February 5, 2015 by the defense counsel

42) Statements in the evidence records 1083 and the trial

43) Evidence records 1291 pages

44) Evidence records 804 pages

45) The discovery price of the death certificate is indicated as the "before January 27, 2014".

46) Evidence records 1069 pages

47) The steam records 1798 pages

48) The evidence record No. 1814 pages and records are written as ‘contractual deposit', but they seem to be ‘amount' in light of the time of return alleged.

49) Investigation records 1068, 1884

50) See 3-B(1)(d)

51) Evidence records 1797 pages

52) Evidence records 1899 pages

53) Evidence records 1900 pages

54) The trial records 157 pages

55) Evidence records 1912~1914

56) Evidence records 1901 pages

57) The trial records 147 pages

58) Evidence records 1085, 1810 pages

59) As to this part, the Defendant and D and G’s statements together with the victim at the time are consistent.

60) Evidence records 1915, 1916 pages

61) Evidence records 1746 pages