The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles and misunderstanding of facts) seems to be an investigator of a judicial police officer who corresponds to the facts charged in the instant case.

F. On March 24, 2016, the document died.

The protocol of the statement to B (No. 2; hereinafter referred to as the “statement of the instant case”) and the protocol of the interrogation of suspects (hereinafter referred to as the “written protocol of the interrogation of suspects”) have been conducted under particularly reliable circumstances as the original person’s statement was made. As such, admissibility of evidence should be recognized in accordance with the proviso to Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

In addition, even if the statement of this case and the suspect interrogation protocol are inadmissible, the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as theO’s statement, etc., can be fully admitted as to the facts charged of this case.

In doing so, the court below dismissed the F’s statement statement of this case and the prosecutor’s application for examination of suspect interrogation record on the ground that there was no proof that F’s statement was made under particularly reliable circumstances, and sentenced the remainder of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone not to be recognized as the facts charged of this case.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on evidence collection and by misunderstanding facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of legal principles, the relevant criminal litigation law adopts the principle of substantial direct deliberation and professional law that the formation of a conviction against the substance of the case should be conducted through the examination of evidence guaranteed by cross-examination of the original evidence in the presence of a judge in order to realize a lawful procedure required by the Constitution.

Therefore, the court should ensure that such substantial principle of direct deliberation and professional rule can function faithfully as a principle and substantial rule of control in the process of criminal proceedings and the trial process, and the exception is the right to receive a fair public trial based on the principle of direct trial and the principle of court-oriented trial and presumption of innocence.