협박
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. A victim of the gist of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) was subject to intimidation from an investigative agency to the original trial, as described in the facts charged;
In full view of the fact that the defendant made a statement, that there was a dispute between the defendant and the victim and that there was no good appraisal of each other, and that there was a sufficient motive for the defendant's intimidation, and the testimony of G and F, etc., the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and finding the defendant not guilty.
2. Determination
A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of the testimony of the witness at the first instance trial, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness at the first instance trial was clearly erroneous in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance trial, in light of the purport and spirit of the substantial direct deliberation principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act.
Unless there exist special circumstances to view that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is significantly unfair, or in light of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of pleadings, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the grounds that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s determination.
In particular, if the first instance judgment rejecting the credibility of the witness’s statement supporting the facts charged is followed, it ought to be the case where sufficient and satisfactory circumstances arise in light of the presumption of innocence and the principle of the burden of proof (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do14065, Mar. 25, 2010). (b) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the instant case is health class and the lower court.