Forgery of private documents, uttering of private investigation documents, attempted fraud, theft, deception

Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties, False Entry into Public Electronic Records, etc.

Events such as private records, illegal events of official document

1. In the case of murder, etc., even if the body of a victim, which is an important proviso to the method of murder or the process of the victim’s death, is destroyed or lost, the charges of murder can be acknowledged by comprehensively examining indirect evidence in relation to each other. In this case, in order to recognize the charge of murder against the defendant who denies the whole crime, the victim’s death should be proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the fact that the crime of murder was committed by the defendant who has the intention of murder (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Do3273, Oct. 22, 1999; 2007Do10754, Mar. 13, 2008). Here, the term “reasonable doubt” refers to the probability of facts that are inconsistent with logical and empirical rules, not all questions and correspondence, and it refers to a reasonable doubt as to the probability of facts that cannot be compatible with the facts that are favorable to the defendant, and thus, it should not be included in abstract doubt or abstract evidence 204.

2. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there was no specific circumstance for the victim’s death, and there was no evidence to support the Defendant’s criminal method or specific behavior with respect to the murder, nor did the Defendant present any material evidence to support the Defendant’s criminal conduct on the day of the instant case, such as implements and drugs used for murder, and the death of the victim directly connected with the victim. The victim did not specifically reveal the cause of the death through autopsy, etc., and there was no evidence to support the existence of a trace of the victim’s external body, blood or body fluid, and earth and sand, etc., on the ground that there was no evidence to support that the cause of the victim’s death had been revealed through autopsy, etc., and that there was no evidence to support the existence of a trace of the victim’s external body, blood or body fluid, and the possibility that the victim died due to influence of drinking on the day of the instant case, or that the victim committed suicide

3. However, in light of the above legal principles, it is difficult to accept the above judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

A. According to the evidence duly adopted by the court of first instance and the court below, as to the defendant's motive for committing the crime, the defendant subscribed to a number of life insurance contracts with the defendant as the insured while paying a large amount of insurance premium to maintain the relationship with the victim due to excessive consumption, such as lending of high-class vehicles to maintain the relationship with the victim in spite of the fact that the defendant, from January 2010, in support of the elderly and his/her mother and his/her married children, it was difficult for him/her to bear a large amount of liability without any certain income, and then, he/she was aware of the fact that the defendant, who was the victim of his/her life care center at the time of his/her death, by using a large amount of insurance premium. ② From around that time, the fact that the court of first instance and the court below had searched the victim's c) and searched him/her with the victim, who was the victim of his/her life care center at the time of his/her death.

In full view of these facts, it seems that the defendant was sufficiently willing to kill the victim by inducing the victim for the purpose of obtaining the body necessary for pretending that he/she died after purchasing a large number of insurance policies that he/she is his/her insured with the intent to escape from extreme economic difficulties.

B. As to the credibility of the defendant's defense counsel, evidence of criminal facts should be presented by the prosecutor in criminal proceedings, and as long as the defendant does not be forced to make a statement unfavorable to himself/herself, even if the defendant's defense counsel is unreasonable and the defendant's defense is the same as that of the false statement, it cannot be made disadvantageous to him/her (Supreme Court Decision 91Do1385 delivered on August 13, 191). However, the possibility that the defendant's defense counsel is reasonable and acceptable can not be a criminal, i.e., whether it can be an important factor for consideration in judging whether the defendant can function as an impeachment for evidence conforming to the facts charged.

The Defendant did not kill the victim. However, in light of the above facts and records, the Defendant’s aforementioned change is difficult to accept. (1) The Defendant stated that the victim complained of the victim from his own car in Busan-dong, Busan-dong, and immediately went to the emergency room in Busan-dong, which is located in Busan-dong, and that he could receive insurance money if the victim used the victim’s death in a timely manner after becoming aware of the death of the victim. However, considering the following circumstances revealed by the aforementioned facts and records, the Defendant’s aforementioned change is difficult to accept. (2) At the time, the Defendant used the victim in Busan-dong, Busan-dong, where the victim died to Busan-dong, and the victim did not appear to have been on the side of his own car until the victim died. (3) At that time, the Defendant was aware that the victim was the victim of the mobile phone from Busan-dong, Busan-dong, and the mobile phone from 10-dong, Busan-dong, and 20-dong, Busan-dong, and the victim was the victim’s mobile phone from 10.

(2) On June 17, 2010: from 30 to 10, the Defendant entered the victim’s body in an emergency room with the victim of △△ apartment before and after the death of the victim and stated that the victim was in an emergency room immediately after the victim’s body was 04:30. However, from the place where the Defendant was unsatisfying the victim, the time required to leave the body of the victim with the vehicle is within 10 minutes, and the time required to identify the victim’s body was 30 minutes after the death. On the other hand, the time that the Defendant arrived at the above hospital appears to have been 05 minutes after the death of the victim, and there was no response to the victim’s body in an emergency room, and it was difficult to view that the Defendant had been aware of the fact that the victim was in an emergency room before the death of the victim, which was the only time before the death of the victim, and that there was no concern about the victim’s body’s death.

(5) Meanwhile, when the Defendant listens to the statement that it is necessary to confirm the deceased’s family’s confirmation and participation in the cremation procedure, the Defendant immediately asked Nonindicted 4 to request the mother of the body as if the body was the Defendant’s body was the body’s completion, and even told Nonindicted 4 that he died of the victim instead of her. (6) The Defendant reversed the previous statement at an investigative agency for the same reason as above, and stated that he had no search or purchase of toxic chemicals such as mers, etc., and that the Defendant had no record of search records and the witness’s statement that he had the body smuggling after the occurrence of the instant case, and again reversed the previous statement.

C. (1) In the event there is no direct evidence to clarify the cause of the victim’s death, such as the victim’s death or suicide, as in the instant case, it is necessary to examine whether the indirect evidence presented is sufficient as an affirmative evidence supporting the facts charged, and whether the possibility of the victim’s death can be reasonably excluded from the Defendant’s act other than the Defendant’s act. However, according to the records, the Defendant’s death on June 16, 2010, which is the day before the date of the victim’s death.

18: At around 00, the victim visited the rest in Daegu and entered Busan around 20:0, and the victim 20: from 39 to 21: 17, the head of the shelter can be informed of the fact that he sent out text messages, such as "I would like to do so," and the mobile phone of the victim was sent around Busan Hodong around 00:0, there was no other evidence to find out the possibility that the victim would have been killed, and that the victim could not have been involved in the suicide from 05:0 to 0:0, there was no possibility that the victim would have been killed. However, the court below determined that there was no possibility that the victim would have been killed, and that there was no possibility that the victim would have been killed, and that there was no possibility that the victim would have been able to die in Busan, and that there was no possibility that the victim would have been able to do so.

(A) First of all, the lower court determined to the effect that the possibility that the victim might have died of the victim due to a disease, such as acute scarbling or acute male, by taking into account the following: (a) the victim had a considerable weight in body; (b) the victim had not been able to function liver due to frequent drinking; (c) the female scarmon system due to scarbly flady, and the treatment chemicals due to scarbly flady, was imprising; and (d) the victim was drinking immediately before the death; and (e) the victim was able to drink immediately before the death. However, even according to the evidence duly adopted by the lower court, the victim cannot be ruled on June 2010.

17. At the time of death, the young women aged 26 years from 2007 to 2009 did not have any scarcity and blood pressure test result in the health examination conducted between 2007 and 2009. The results of the 2008 and 2009 were within the normal range. However, even though the 2007 and 2008 were less than the normal range, Nonindicted 5 in the death examination statement to the effect that the young women, such as the victim, were unlikely to die due to a heart disease, etc. In addition, even though the health insurance benefit (Evidence record 550 pages) for the victim, it is difficult to view that it was clear whether the victim was friendly or female therapy because of the lack of the content of the victim’s health insurance benefit (Evidence record 550 pages).

On the other hand, the nurse Nonindicted 6, who was in an emergency room at the time, stated that “the victim’s scam and face, and scamscam on the scams attached to the scam.” (Evidence Record 583~584 pages), and the nurse’s maximum guidance “scamscamscamscamscambling at the time, but scamscamscamscamscamscams at the time, and scamscamscams (Evidence Record 574~575 pages of evidence records).

If so, the court below should have deliberated more detailedly on whether the victim might die within a short time during the period of emergency room, not just on the ground that the victim died, but on the ground that the result of the health examination conducted between 1 and 2 years prior to the death of the victim, the court below should have deliberated on whether the victim might die within the short time, such as whether the victim might die within the hospital room, and whether the victim might die within the short time, as argued by the defendant.

B. In addition, the lower court determined that it is difficult to eliminate the possibility of the victim’s suicide by using drugs, etc. in contingency, dynamicly and dynamicly, on the grounds that the victim had an opinion of depression due to stress caused by physical causes, such as the influence of home environment and chronological well-being.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted by the court below, the victim could not be found in the record that there was a circumstance that the victim expressed suicide or attempted to do so while leaving the shelter in Busan, and that the health of the womb was improved due to the medication of female Homon system. The victim sent a text message from the shelter before the death day to the head of the shelter and the head of the Dong in Busan, which contains the contents that the victim would have made a very effort to bring money to his school in Busan, even while the defendant was going to Busan, and that the victim would bring his clothes to the rest of the shelter in Busan, and that other clothes would bring other things to the rest in Busan, and that the victim would go to go to the rest in the rest in Busan, and if the victim committed suicide at the time of death, it cannot be seen that the victim had a stimulative effect on the part of the victim.

On the other hand, as seen earlier, with respect to the situation at the time of the change of the victim, the defendant continued to move the victim to Busan, and there was no special reason until he was in front of the △ apartment, and there was no special reason for the victim to go back to five minutes after the victim went back to the near, and the victim did not go to the near, and therefore, the victim complained of scarcity and scarcity, and there was a change to the purport that "the defendant complained of scarcity," and "the scarcity was biased." However, there was no examination in the court below as to whether there was any other special circumstance that the victim would have committed suicide during the short period as mentioned above, and what possible means of suicide could be.

Therefore, the lower court should have carefully examined the following: (a) whether the victim was in a shelter prior to the clerical error in Busan; (b) whether there was any special circumstance in which the victim could feel the impulse of suicide; (c) whether the Defendant had committed an act that could cause the victim’s death; and (d) whether there was any reason to cause the victim to be an opportunity to feel the victim’s suicide even if he was in a sudden place after the Plaintiff’s death; and (c) whether there was any signs of the victim’s attitude or behavior; (d) whether the Defendant’s suicide by using toxic chemicals during a short period of time is possible in the situation at the time when the Defendant’s death was committed by using the means of suicide to the extent that he would have caused the victim’s death at the time of his death; and (e) whether the body’s death could be caused by the victim’s death at the time of his death at the hospital.

C. Furthermore, the lower court determined that it is difficult to readily believe that the victim was killed on the ground that the victim’s body did not snificing drugs, such as agricultural chemicals, etc. at the victim’s body, did not snificing any external force on the part of the victim’s body, and earth and sand, etc. likely to presume the death by toxic substances, etc. were not found in the victim’s clothes, bodies, or vehicles.

원심이 판시한 것처럼 이 사건에서 피해자의 구체적인 사망경위나 피고인의 범행방법을 객관적으로 인정할 만한 물적 증거가 제출된 바는 없다. 그러나 기록에 의하면, 피고인은 자신을 피보험자로 하는 다수의 생명보험에 가입한 무렵부터 이 사건 발생 이전까지 인터넷에서 ' 메소밀 ', ' 그라목손 ', ' 시안화칼륨 ' 등 독극물이나 ' 자살싸이트 ', ' 살인 방법 ', ' 사망신고절차 ' 등을 검색어로 하여 여러 차례 검색을 한 사실, 특히 이 사건 발생일로부터 약 20일 전인 2010. 5. 30. 경 쉼터를 방문하여 피해자를 면담한 후 2010. 6. 3. 메소밀을 판매하는 곳으로 의심되는 화훼단지에 전화하였고, 같은 날부터 다음날 사이에 인터넷으로 ' 메소밀 냄새, 메소밀 + 중독, 메소밀 + 음독, 메소밀 100㎖ 음독 ' 등의 검색어를 집중적으로 검색한 사실, 피고인은 이 사건 발생일로부터 약 2주 후인 2010년 7월 초순경 연하의 남자 친구를 만나 그의 아이를 임신하였다고 거짓말하면서 연인관계의 복원을 요청하였으나 이를 거절당하자 메소밀이 들어 있는 플라스틱 병을 꺼내 보이면서 " 사람들이 괜히 어려운 약 찾는데 이 약은 구하기도 쉽고 고통도 덜하게 죽는다. 나도 죽고 우리 아이도 죽게 하겠다 " 는 취지로 말하는 등 자살소동을 벌였던 사실 등을 알 수 있다 .

In addition, according to the medical advisory report on the preparation of Nonindicted Party 6, the nurse, etc. in an emergency room of the ▽▽▽▽▽▽△△ Hospital, the victim was in an emergency room at the court of first instance, and the victim was not sniffed in the body, but the front chest part of the chest part of the chest part. (253-254 pages of the trial record) In addition, according to the medical advisory report on the preparation of Nonindicted Party 7, which is the advisory body of the Busan District Public Prosecutor’s Office, there is excessive invasion as one of the symptoms during the use of merposty (Evidence 798 pages of the evidence record). In addition, according to the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, the time of presumption of the victim’s death is at least 30 minutes from the arrival of the emergency room.

Therefore, the lower court should have deliberated in depth about the time required by the prosecutor for the first time until the death of the victim, whether it is difficult to easily find out odor, color, sme, and sme in cases where the body is smeed or beer, etc. by the time required until the death of the victim, whether it is difficult for the prosecutor to have the body easily discovered by smelling, color, and sme, etc., to the extent that the degree of the death is to be caused by the death, and whether the symptoms that flow out to the upper part of the chest are frequently discovered from the body of the body of the victim.

D. In full view of the above circumstances, the lower court acquitted the victim of this part of the charges solely for the reasons indicated in its holding, on the grounds that there is no objective evidence to acknowledge the victim’s reason of death or the method of committing the crime, and there is any doubt about the victim’s possibility of death or suicide.

In doing so, there is a defect that does not complete the necessary deliberation in a serious crime case such as murder, and this constitutes an illegal cause that may affect the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the ground of appeal pointing this out is with merit.

On the other hand, in the case where the appellate court recognized the guilty of some of the facts constituting several offenses, and only the prosecutor filed an appeal against the acquittal. The prosecutor’s final appeal against the acquittal portion is with merit, and if the crime which the appellate court found the guilty and the crime which found the innocence are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the guilty portion of the appellate court’s judgment should also be reversed together with the

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed in its entirety, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Chang-soo

Chief Justice Park Poe-dae

Justices Go Young-young