The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Voluntaryness of each interrogation protocol of the accused prepared by the prosecutor in the trial process of the case subject to review against the accused; (b) there is no evidence to acknowledge that the accused was harsh in the police investigation process in addition to the accused's assertion; (c) even if the accused committed cruel acts in the police investigation process, there is no evidence to deem that the prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of the accused was continued in the police in the process of preparing the protocol of interrogation of the accused; and (d) there is no evidence to support that the admissibility of the protocol of interrogation of the accused prepared by the prosecutor as to the accused, even if the admissibility of the protocol of interrogation

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the defendant's written statement and each protocol of interrogation of the defendant against the defendant can be acknowledged as facts prepared in the police investigation as a matter of course, since the admissibility of each of the above evidences should be dismissed as a matter of course, since the defendant's written statement and each protocol of interrogation of the defendant against the defendant are acknowledged as facts committed in the police investigation process

B. In addition, in a case where the defendant made a confession without voluntariness due to harsh acts, such as adviser, at an investigative agency prior to the prosecutor’s inspection, and thereafter made a confession of the same contents even at the prosecutor’s investigation stage, even though there was no coercion of confession such as adviser at the prosecutor’s investigation stage, the confession before the prosecutor’s investigation stage is also deemed to be a confession without voluntariness (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Do2409, Nov. 24, 1992). The purport of denying the admissibility of the evidence of the non-voluntary statement is to induce