[상습사기][집31(1)형,146;공1983.4.1.(701)550]
The probative value of protocol signed and sealed by a judge who does not attend the relevant date of trial as a presiding judge.
Since the presiding judge to sign and seal the protocol of public trial shall be the presiding judge who has opened the relevant protocol of public trial, the protocol of public trial signed and sealed by a judge who has not opened the relevant protocol of public trial cannot be said to be the protocol of public trial, and such protocol of public trial is null and void under the Civil Procedure Act, so there is no probative value as the protocol of public trial
Articles 53 and 56 of the Criminal Procedure Act
Defendant
Prosecutor
Attorney Lee Han-soo
Seoul Criminal Court Decision 82No2991 delivered on September 10, 1982
The judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Criminal Court.
We examine the grounds of appeal ex officio before determining them.
1. According to the records, the court below sentenced September 10 of the same year on the basis of the pleadings closed at the fourth trial on September 3, 1982, and sentenced September 10 of the same year, and the above pleadings were involved by the judge, Nonindicted 1, 2, and Nonindicted 3, and the composition of the court below is also the above judge, but the above protocol of trial was signed and sealed by the judge, as the presiding judge, on September 10, 1982.
2. If the provisions of Articles 51, 53, and 56 of the Criminal Procedure Act are gathered, the protocol of trial shall be prepared by the court administrative officer or clerk who has participated in the proceedings of the court date, and in this protocol, the presiding judge and the court administrative officer or clerk who has participated in the proceedings of the court date shall sign and seal the protocol of trial, and in the protocol of trial all litigation procedures including the position and name of the judge, public prosecutor, court administrative officer or clerk who has participated in the trial, and in the protocol of trial, those recorded in the protocol of trial shall be proved only by the protocol of trial. Since the presiding judge who is to sign and seal on the protocol of trial shall be the presiding judge who has participated in the relevant court date, the protocol of trial signed and sealed by a judge who has not attended the court date shall be deemed to be invalid in the protocol of trial under the Civil Procedure Act, and therefore, since there is no probative value as a document of trial at the relevant court date, the
3. If so, the judgment of the court below that was rendered based on this pleading cannot be deemed to be a judgment rendered through legitimate procedures, and the decision of the court below that was rendered based on this pleading cannot be deemed to be a judgment that was rendered through legitimate procedures, and the necessity of judgment as to the decision of the appeal is not reversed.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the Seoul Criminal Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)