beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. As to the witness examination of the contents of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), if a witness gives an answer to the purport that he/she is able to affirm the contents of the detailed examination even though he/she was not aware of or was unable to memory, he/she shall be deemed to have made a false statement contrary to his/her memory (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do57 delivered on June 23, 1981, etc.). If a witness gives a testimony that he/she is aware of the contents of his/her testimony while he/she was well aware of the contents of his/her testimony, he/she shall be deemed to have made a false statement against his/her memory (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 86Do57 delivered on September 9, 1986). However, in the prosecution, the defendant's testimony is a statement against his/her memory.
The lending company did not ask the employees of the lending company.
In relation to the process of making a false statement and making a false statement, “in this case’s testimony at the time of the testimony of the instant lawsuit, he/she is fluort in the same manner as he/she is he/she.
The judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case, in light of the evidence presented by the prosecutor, such as the statement in the investigation agency of I, and the record recording of each currency with G and H, by making a statement to the effect that “as if the facts were experienced through division of conversation with E, the same shall be the same as that of the facts.” The court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case.
2. Determination
A. On the grounds stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant made a false statement against his memory, such as the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone, as stated in the facts charged.
It is insufficient to recognize the facts charged of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge them, and judged not guilty.
B. 1) The conviction in a criminal trial can lead to a judge’s conviction that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.