The non-recognition of facts constituting an offense and the statement of evidence

The statement that there is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge the facts of crime even though there is evidence in the trial sufficient to recognize the facts of crime constitutes a violation of the rules of evidence.

Articles 307, 308, and 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Prosecutor

Daegu District Court and Daegu High Court of the second instance;

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

On February 14, 4287, the gist of the facts charged by the prosecutor's appeal by the chief prosecutor of the Daegu High Public Prosecutor's Office re-guilty the victim non-indicted 2's injury requiring treatment for about two weeks from the close of the mutual conflict between the victim non-indicted 1 and the defendant's non-indicted 2's right-hand side of the defendant's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3's statement that the defendant's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 1's prosecutor's first instance court's non-indicted 1's non-indicted 2 and the victim's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 4's statement that the defendant's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3's oral statement that the defendant's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3's oral statement was without sufficient evidence.

Although there are each contents in the statement of testimony and diagnosis of Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 3’s testimony and examination of Nonindicted 4, each of Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 3’s testimony which are sufficient to recognize the facts charged of this case, the court below recognized that there was no evidence to acknowledge the facts charged without any instruction of other reasons, which is contrary to the rules of evidence, and therefore, it is in violation of the rules of evidence. Accordingly, with regard to the grounds for appeal, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by Article 448-2 of the Addenda of the Criminal Procedure Act in order to re-examine the court below.

Justices Kim Byung-ro (Presiding Justice) and Justice Han-jin, Justice Han-jin, Justice Kim Jong-ro (Presiding Justice)