업무상과실치상등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
The lower court acquitted the Defendant on the facts charged that the Defendant intentionally written differently from the fact, such as “I would not receive any other dental treatment until he or she gets after the outbreak of fluort” and “I would make a false examination after one month” (hereinafter “the instant text”).
However, considering that the phrase of this case is not written directly by the defendant but written as a pen, the defendant's statement is not consistent, E's statement is consistent and credibility, and witness F's testimony is not reliable in light of the relation with the defendant, etc., the court below found the defendant not guilty of the above facts charged, but it erred by misapprehending the legal principles and misunderstanding of facts.
The punishment of the court below (4 million won) which is unfair in sentencing is too unhued and unfair.
Judgment
In a criminal trial on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the recognition of facts should 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 extent to have the aforementioned conviction, even if there is doubt of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable dismissal, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 201). In addition, in light of the fact that the appellate trial has the character as an ex post facto trial even after it belongs to the court, and in addition, in light of the spirit of substantial direct deliberation as prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Act, it is difficult for the first instance court to exclude reasonable doubts after undergoing the examination of evidence, such as examination of witness.
Considering that the facts charged are not guilty.