국가보안법위반(간첩)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the evidence documents against the Defendants and the joint Defendants, including the Defendants and the joint Defendants, submitted by the prosecutor, are based on harsh acts such as the illegal confinement and advisory during the investigation process, and they are inadmissible as evidence without a warrant, and the evidence seized without a warrant is inadmissible as evidence of collection. However, since the Defendants and the joint Defendants’ statement in the court was made with the assistance of counsel in the open court, it is voluntary and other evidence recognized as admissible as evidence, the lower court acquitted the Defendants of all the facts charged, and found the Defendants guilty of all the charges,
Judgment
The summary of the judgment of the court below is that the defendants and joint defendants suffered illegal confinement, adviser and cruel acts in the course of the investigation of this case. 1) Since the defendants and joint defendants denied the contents of the protocol of interrogation of the police and the written statements or statements prepared by the police against the defendants in this case, they are not admissible in accordance with Article 312 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act. 2) The written protocol of interrogation of the defendants and joint defendants, each of the prosecutor's office's and joint defendants' testimony and witness B, AX and AY's legal statements against the defendants cannot be recognized as voluntary, and 3) all of them and those who are not joint defendants (hereinafter "third parties"), written statements and written statements prepared by the prosecutor's office and the police, written statements and written statements prepared by them, written statements and written statements prepared by the police, written statements prepared by the defendants and the joint defendants, written statements prepared by the police, and written statements or written statements prepared by the police are not proved as evidence, they cannot be admissible as evidence of seizure or evidence under Article 313 of the Criminal Procedure Act.