2019Gohap113(A) Special Violence, etc.

(b) Concealment of evidence;

2019Gohap825(combined)(C). Special violence

1.(c) A

2.2.B

3.2.C

4. (b) D.

Newly Inserted by Act No. 1010, Jan. 1, 201

Law Firm E (for all the defendants):

Attorney F, G

Law Firm H (Defendant A, B, and C)

Attorney I, J

Law Firm K (Defendant D)

Attorney L

February 18, 2020

Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for seven years, and imprisonment with prison labor for eight months.

However, with respect to defendants B, C, and D, the execution of each of the above punishments shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Defendant B, C, and D order each of 80 hours of social service.

Of the facts charged against Defendant B, C, and D, each of the facts charged on September 16, 2018 is acquitted.

The summary of the acquittal part in this judgment shall be publicly notified.

Criminal facts

【Institution of Sanctions】

Defendant A operates the traditional martial art hall called “N” on the fourth floor of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government M building, refers to the president, instructors, and trainees who teach themselves, and have the president, instructors, and trainees absolutely obey their orders, and Defendant B is the president, instructors, and trainees; Defendant B is the president of “N”, and Defendant C and Defendant D are the instructors of “N.”

The victim (32 years old) is a trainee of the seal affixed by the defendants with traditional martial arts, etc. from 'N' for about three years prior to 3 years.

[2019Gohap113]

1. Defendant A’s special assault, etc.;

As above, the Defendant demanded the president, instructors, and trainees of “N” to absolutely obey, and continuously committed physical violence against the victim by taking advantage of the autopsy, etc. on the ground that the victim does not concentrate on the law lecture or does not observe the Defendant’s direction.

On September 16, 2018, from around 17:54 to 19:09 on the same day, the Defendant was at the time of her head, etc., her head, etc., and her part of the body due to the autopsy, etc., of dangerous articles that the victim did not properly conduct the English translation of the law.

On September 16, 2018, the Defendant had Q Hospital located in P in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, caused the victim's death in Q Hospital with a pressure crush syndrome due to continuous and wide range of divers and damage to the surrounding diverse, etc.

2. Concealment of evidence by Defendants B, C, and D

After the investigation by the senior police station is conducted due to the death of the victim as above, the Defendants and A conspired to replace both the victims, such as the telephone details, text messages, pictures, video images, etc., and both the Defendants and A’ cell phoness, on which evidentiary materials related to the death can be confirmed, with different cell phoness, and to conceal existing cell phoness.

Accordingly, around September 22, 2018, Defendants and A replaced Defendant C, B, and A’s cell phones in the middle cell phone located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government with a medium cell phone, and replaced Defendant D’s cell phone from the above store with a medium cell phone on October 2, 2018, and Defendant D had four cell phones used for the Defendants and A around that time.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to conceal evidence on another person's criminal case.

[2019 Highis825 [Defendant A]

피고인은 2018. 5. 5. 오후경 'N'에서 피해자를 비롯한 수련생을 상대로 법문강의를 하던 중 피해자가 휴대전화를 진동 상태에서 무음으로 조정하면서 만지작거리자 피해자에게 "미친년아! 끊임없이 잔머리야, 휴대폰 꺼 이년아! 저거 미친년 아냐! 대가리 박아 복도에서!"라고 소리치고, 계속하여 피해자가 제대로 반성하지 않았다는 이유로 화가 나 피해자에게 "제일 미련한 년이 몽둥이 맞고, 욕먹는 년이야 이 썅년아! 왜 대답을 안 해! 개 같은 년들이! 몽둥이 가져와."라고 한 다음 피해자가 그 곳에 비치되어 있는 위험한 물건인 목검(길이 약 70㎝, 폭 1㎝)을 들고 와 피고인에게 건네주자 위 목검으로 피해자의 머리, 등, 종아리 등을 39회 때렸다.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

[2019Gohap113]

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of the witness S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, AB, AC, AD, and AE, and the legal statement of AF (as to the defendant A);

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of each prosecutor's suspect against the Defendants

1. Each protocol of seizure (number 27, 31, 60, 121, 129, 133, 137, 141, 145, 149, 255, 287), each digital evidence analysis report (number 71, 83), verification records (number 25), and photographs attached thereto;

1. The autopsy report prepared by the Z, the autopsy report attached thereto (No. 18,19), the autopsy report prepared by the AG (No. 241), the written opinion prepared by the AE (No. 336), and the legal medical journal report prepared by the AF (for Defendant A, No. 345, No. 345);

1. The video recorded on May 5, 2018 (for example, No. 112 CDs)

1. Account transactions (net 2), No. 3, first-aid services (net 3, No. 5,268), photograph (net 5,268), each CCTV photograph (net 11,264), photofacing a mobile phone screen (net 41), 254, 272, 254, 260, 266, 30, 35, 36, 25, 30, 36, 36, 35, 45, 30, 295, 298, 36, 36, 30, 30, 45, 30, 311, 313, 45, 29, 30, 29, 35, 30, 35, 30, 313, 31, 31, 313, and 34, 19

1. Each investigation report (related to the purchase of cell phones of the suspects, relation to the analysis of digital evidence of the suspect's cell phoness, relation to the removal of cell phoness and external pictures in buildings, relation to the crypical and external pictures of the victim's cell phoness, results of analysis, voice and documents seized within N, relation to the verification of victim'sless crypology, relation to the confirmation of digital evidence of the victim's crypology, relation to the victim's crypology, relation to the pocket discovered at the victim's home, relation to the pocket discovered at the victim's home, relation to the pocket discovered at the victim's home, relation between the victim's crypology and the victim's cell phoness, relation to the victim's crypologys, relation to the victim's crypologys and external pictures, relation to the victim's friendly apartment located in the apartment before the victim's death, 30-637, 97-97, 97-17, 97

1. A report on the occurrence of an accident (definite history, No. 240), report on internal investigation (the occupation-related relationship, No. 254), report on internal investigation (the situation according to the time zone in which the case occurred) and the attached screen of CCTV by time zone and CCTV screen;

[2019Gohap825]

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. Some of the statements made by the defendant A in the copy of each protocol of examination of the suspect;

1. A copy of the pocket book;

1. Each investigation report (related to the analysis of video images conducted on May 5, 2018, and sprinks used for assault by the suspect on May 5, 2018);

【Judgment on the Admissibility of Evidence】

1. Summary of the defendants and defense counsel's assertion

Of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the pocketbooks and documents held by Defendant B, C, and D (including evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5-7, 14-16, and 27-33, and the evidence No. 108, 110, 221, 222, 224, 225, 227-230, hereinafter referred to as the "documents of this case") among the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, and the video of May 5, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as "the video of this case") were seized through execution of the relevant warrant even though they do not correspond to the "goods to be seized" as stated in the search and seizure warrant, and the video of this case is not related to the facts of the relevant warrant. Therefore, the above documents and videos are illegally collected in violation of the warrant principle, and thus, they cannot be convicted of the Defendants.

2. Relevant principles;

A. In light of the due process and the spirit of warrant requirement to be implemented under the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act, a judge’s text and text to specify “goods to be seized” in issuing a search and seizure warrant shall be strictly interpreted, and it shall not be permitted to expand or analogically interpret the contents unfavorable to the persons to be seized, etc. without permission (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do763, Mar. 12, 2009). However, the subject of search and seizure shall not be limited to goods directly related to the criminal facts themselves of the search and seizure warrant, but it may be conducted to the extent that there are considerable grounds to suspect that the criminal facts of the search and seizure warrant and the basic facts are identical or similar to the criminal acts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do2649, Jul. 23, 2009).

B. In principle, evidence collected in violation of the procedures prescribed by the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act shall not be admitted as evidence for conviction, since it does not comply with the lawful procedures prepared to guarantee fundamental human rights. However, in cases of exceptional cases where the admissibility of evidence is deemed to result in a violation of the principle of due process and the purpose of realizing criminal justice by preparing a procedural provision concerning criminal procedure and promoting harmony between the principle of due process and substantial truth and promoting the realization of criminal justice, the court may use it as evidence for conviction (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2007Do3061, Nov. 15, 2007). However, in cases where it is deemed that a prosecutor’s act of violation of the procedural provision and its content and degree of violation, specific course and possibility of evasion, relation between the right to protect and the defendant, degree of causation between the procedural provision and the collection of evidence, and degree of perception and intent of the investigative agency, it does not constitute an exceptional case where it is deemed that there is no specific and exceptional evidence collected in the process (see, see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2007Do6).

3. Facts and circumstances of recognition;

The record reveals the following facts and circumstances:

A. On October 1, 2018, the Seoul Central District Court judge issued a warrant of search, seizure, and verification (hereinafter referred to as “first warrant of seizure”) with the period of validity as the name and the poor, the place to be searched as the fourth N Office in Jongno-gu M building, and the period of validity as the date October 14, 2018. The above warrant is written as follows:

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

B. During the enforcement of the first seizure warrant from N on October 3, 2018 at N around 13:00 by the police branch of the Seoul Guro Police Station and the AO Team (hereinafter referred to as “AO team”), Defendant D had been witnessed by the assistant U to the AO team affiliated with the AO team in the manner that part of the documents of this case remains in the NO room, and the wall gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate gate installed. The police officers of the AO team seized the above documents from Defendant D (hereinafter referred to as “the above documents”) and seized the remainder of the documents of this case except for the sloping gate gate gate gate gate.

The protocol of seizure prepared in relation to the above seizure (referred to the sequences in the prosecutor's evidence list, 27, hereinafter referred to as "in the absence of a separate reference) is recorded as follows:

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

C. At around 15:40 on October 4, 2018, the head of the AO team: (a) proposed an investigation report (related to the execution of a warrant of search and seizure inspection, and seizure articles; (b) obtained approval from the person with authority to approve the investigation report (application for search and seizure inspection, No. 42) at around 16:43 on the same day; and (c) proposed an investigation report (application for search and seizure inspection, No. 42) at around 16:59 on the same day.

A person shall be appointed.

D. On October 4, 2018, the prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office requested a warrant of search, seizure, and verification to the Seoul Central District Court upon the police's request, and the Seoul Central District Court judge issued three copies of the warrant of search, seizure, and verification upon the above request. Each of the above warrants contains one document (A4 paper) and two copies of the book (A4 paper) stating the main contents of the case held and kept by the defendant B, one document (A4 paper) and three copies of the book (3 papers) held and kept by the defendant C, together with the documents (A4 paper) stating the contents of the case in possession and custody by the defendant D, and all of the documents (A4 paper), including the document (A4 paper), the place, body, things, etc. of search, seizure and verification as Seoul Metropolitan City 46 police stations, and the contents of the search, seizure warrant and verification request (hereinafter referred to as the "written request for search and inspection") are commonly recorded as the "written request for search and inspection" (hereinafter referred to as the "written request for search and inspection").

E. On October 8, 2018, the police officers affiliated with AO Team visited the above NO’s office and returned the instant documents to Defendant B, C, and D, and immediately executed the second warrant of seizure by means of seizing the instant documents from the said Defendants at the same place.

F. The documents of this case consisting of printed forms A4 or a pocket book. The contents written in the above documents consisting of most of the police's expected questions, answers thereto, and instructions for investigation and response to police investigations, and some of them include N trainees' names, such as AP, Q, AR, D, AS, and AT.

G. The police officers belonging to the AO team have seized digital information storage media, such as the NAD (hereinafter referred to as the NAD) in the process of executing the first search warrant at the place specified in the above paragraph (b). On October 19, 2018, the above Defendant participated in the process of sealing the storage media, such as NOD, and confirmed that there was no error in the seals. The above Defendant was notified that he would be able to participate in the process of removing seals, acquiring copies, searching, copying, and printing the storage media or copies, and signed and sealed the 'electronic information confirmation (for release of digital apparatus, storage media, etc.)’ with the content that he would not participate in the above process (hereinafter referred to as 39). On October 5, 2018, the AO team requested an analysis of digital evidence on NOD, etc., and received the results of the analysis from 15,000 to 19,000 of the digital information and confirmed that the digital information was seized more than 19,01,00.7.1.1.1 of the digital information.

4. Determination on the admissibility of the instant documents

A. It is evident that the document of this case does not constitute a voluntarily produced article. In addition, if a certain article constitutes "oiled article" under Article 218 of the Criminal Procedure Act, it should be deemed that the article was abandoned from the possession of the possessor, etc. However, in the execution of the first seizure warrant, the defendant D remains in the room of the escape room and the defendant D remains in the space between the window of the escape room and the wall gate. It is only seized by the police. In this situation, it cannot be said that "the escape room was separated from the possession of the defendant D," and there is no other circumstance to view the document of this case, including the escape room, as the document of this case can not be confiscated without a warrant under Article 218 of the Criminal Procedure Act. Thus, in order for the above document to be legally collected evidence, it should be deemed that the above document was lawfully seized and seized.

B. In order to constitute “Membership List”, the main contents of the pertinent document must be organized by arranging personal information, such as the name, address, contact number, etc. of its members. Since the instant document is basically a document that has prepared countermeasures against police investigations, even if the name presumed to be part of N members is stated in the content, it cannot be said that the said document does not constitute “Membership List.” Furthermore, it is evident that the said document does not constitute “a tool that may affect the joint appearance or an electronic information.” Therefore, the said document does not constitute “goods to be seized” as stated in the first warrant of seizure, regardless of whether it is related to the criminal facts stated in the first warrant of seizure, so the said document cannot be said to have been lawfully seized by the first warrant of seizure.

C. Seizure is a compulsory disposition involving the acquisition of possession of an article and the continuation of possession. However, the execution of the second seizure warrant was conducted in the form of temporarily returning the already seized document and immediately re-taking it. However, it is difficult to view that the investigative agency newly acquired possession of the instant document through the execution of the second seizure warrant. Rather, the said seizure warrant is illegal as it was based on the first seizure warrant, given that there was no substantial change in the situation before and after the execution of the second seizure warrant. As such, the said seizure warrant is still illegal. The issuance and execution of the second seizure warrant only after the second seizure warrant is lawful, or the causal relationship with the procedural defect that occurred during the execution of the first seizure warrant is mitigated. In such a case, even if the preceding seizure was unlawful, it would result in acquiring the legality of the subsequent seizure by obtaining a new warrant without returning the seized document ex post facto without returning it. Thus, the purport of Articles 216 and 217 of the Criminal Procedure Act that limit the requirements for ex post facto seizure warrant is likely to be dismissed.

D. If the illegality of the seizure of the instant documents based on the warrant of search and seizure does not constitute a violation of the substantive substance of due process, and rather, it constitutes exceptional cases in which the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act are deemed to have resulted in a violation of the intent of realizing criminal justice by promoting harmony between the principle of due process and the establishment of substantial truth, there may be room for recognizing the admissibility of the instant documents. However, the instant case does not constitute such exceptional cases for the following reasons.

1) According to the principle of warrant requirement, a general warrant that permits comprehensive compulsory disposition without specifying the subject of search and seizure is prohibited. In this regard, Articles 219 and 114(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act explicitly list the matters to be stated in the search and seizure warrant and specify the "subject matter to be seized" during the search and seizure warrant. In light of this, it is particularly careful to recognize exceptions to the evaluation of admissibility of seized articles beyond the scope of "subject matter to be seized" stated in the search and seizure warrant.

2) The instant documents are in the form of a printed paper, printed form, or pocket book, which enables immediate verification of the content at a site, other than electronic information. In addition, most of the above documents are countermeasures against police investigation, and only the entry that can be presumed in the name of N’s member is a small number of statements. Therefore, it appears that the AO team that executed the first warrant of seizure, which executed the warrant of seizure, could not be easily seen that the instant documents do not fall under the membership list at the site of the execution of the warrant.

3) With respect to the document of seizure prepared in relation to the execution of the first warrant of seizure, there exists a statement that “a person who is presumed to have entered his/her members, etc.” was seized in accordance with Article 218 of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the document of seizure prepared in relation to the document of seizure. If the police determined that the document of seizure prepared in relation to the execution of the first warrant of seizure could fall under the “list of members” because the name, etc. of the member was entered in the document of seizure at the time of the execution of the first warrant of seizure, and the police could legally seize the document by the first warrant of seizure, then there is no reason to mention Article 216 of the Criminal Procedure Act that provides for the seizure without the warrant of seizure in the above protocol of seizure. Rather, in light of the context mentioned in Article 216 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the document of this case is presumed to include the “member, etc.” merely because the document of this case is presumed to constitute the document of seizure in the first warrant of seizure.

4) Furthermore, in the investigation report (related to the execution of a warrant for search and inspection and the seizure of seized articles), there is no particular content as to whether the warrant falls under the scope of seizure as stated in the first warrant for search and seizure, and there is a lack of logic to determine that the instant documents are within the scope of the first warrant for seizure on the basis of “the location of the defendant B and C’s position” as to the remainder other than the savement of the instant documents, but the mere position of the owner of the seized articles is insufficient to say that the relevant seized articles is within the scope of the warrant for seizure. In the investigation report (application for a warrant for search and inspection of seizure) made thereafter, the instant documents are deemed as important evidence to prove the suspicion of the defendant B, C, and D, and there is no content of determination as to whether the said documents fall under the scope of seizure of the first warrant for search and seizure. In light of this, it is doubtful whether the said documents are included in the scope of seizure of the first warrant for search and seizure.

5) As seen earlier, an investigative agency did not specify “goods to be seized” of the first seizure warrant from the beginning as “member list”, but did not specify “documents, as in the second seizure warrant, stating the relevant contents of the case held or kept by a suspect, as in the second seizure warrant, and received an application for a search and seizure warrant, and could sufficiently avoid such illegality in the execution of the first seizure warrant as seen earlier. In addition, in a case where, even though having relation to a case during the process of execution of a seizure warrant, the investigative agency should have taken measures to suspend the execution of the existing warrant and to obtain a separate warrant, in principle, if it finds any goods that deviate from the scope of seizure. However, in the case of documents of a seizure warrant, the investigative agency

Since Defendant D committed an act that could be seen as the concealment of evidence, such as destroying the above documents to the space between the window of the escape room and the wall sloping map, it seems that there was no time to take such measures. However, in such a case, the investigative agency could immediately arrest Defendant D as a flagrant offender in the crime of concealing evidence, seize Defendant D as an urgent seizure pursuant to Article 216(1)2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and then obtain a warrant of ex post facto seizure pursuant to Article 217(2) of the same Act. However, AO team did not take the same measures as above.

5. Determination on the admissibility of the motion picture of this case

① The video of this case constitutes “electronic information stored in an auxiliary memory medium (applicable only to the Ndrid) such as hard disks in custody, which is an object to be seized stated in the primary seizure warrant.” 2) Since the phrase stating that the date and time of the crime stated in the primary seizure warrant is from an unknown date to September 16, 2018, and that the above crime was committed an indecent assault, the video of this case constitutes evidence related to the same crime as stated in the primary seizure warrant or at least the same factual basis. ③ The N Office, the place where the primary seizure warrant was executed, was lawfully stored in a large quantity of files exceeding Ndrid, and thus, it seems reasonable to have interfered with the seizure and seizure of the Defendant’s right to be present during the process of seizure and storage of the aforementioned digital information stored in the Ndrid, and thus, it would be reasonable to have interfered with the seizure and release of the aforementioned digital information by the Ndrid’s members.

6. Conclusion

Ultimately, the instant documents are evidence collected without following the lawful procedure and are inadmissible pursuant to Article 308-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act. Furthermore, the part of each prosecutor’s interrogation protocol against the Defendants, which presented the above documents and made a statement, also constitutes secondary evidence obtained based on the evidence collected without following due process, is inadmissible. (3) On the other hand, the instant video is admissible as it is the evidence collected through due process.

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Articles 262, 261, 260(1), and 259(1) of the Criminal Act (a) and Articles 261 and 260(1) of the Criminal Act (a) of the Criminal Act;

B. Defendant B, C, and D: Articles 155(1) and 30 of the Criminal Code; the choice of imprisonment

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendant A: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (within the scope that the sum of the long-term punishments of the crimes of special assault and death, which are heavier than the punishment, is added to the punishment)

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant B, C, and D: each Criminal Code Article 62(1)(The favorable circumstances considered as the reasons for sentencing below)

1. Social service order;

Defendant B, C, and D: each Criminal Code Article 62-2

Judgment on the defendants' and defense counsel's arguments

1. Judgment on the charge of special assault by Defendant A

A. Defendant A’s assertion

① Of the facts charged, the phrase “a person who acts to obey absolute orders” refers to himself/herself and does not constitute a assault against the above defendant, and thus, this part of the indictment is null and void in violation of the principle of an indictment only. ② Defendant A was under the command of the victim in order to take actions, such as seeing and viewing obscene images. At the time, the victim was weared with soil, etc., and the victim was replaced with his/her head, and thus, it cannot be said that there was no intention to commit a assault against the victim. ③ Since the command of the victim was used only to the extent that the victim was unfolded and there was no possibility to injure the victim, it cannot be said that the victim’s act constitutes an unlawful act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act upon the victim’s request by the victim and mother of the victim. ④ Since the victim and mother of the victim were not subject to the victim’s consent under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, this constitutes an unlawful act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

(b) Relevant legal principles;

1) The indictment is not allowed to put the grounds that may cause the court’s prejudice as a fact other than the facts required by law. However, if the part of the first head of the charge appears to be aimed at clarifying the motive, background, or relation with the person related to the case that caused the crime, it cannot be said that the pertinent part of the charge is contrary to the principle of an indictment only by stating matters which cause the court’s prejudice (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 93Do3145, Mar. 11, 1994).

2) Violence in the crime of assault refers to the exercise of an unlawful tangible force against a human body. The illegality should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the purpose and intent of the act, the circumstances at the time of the act, the form and type of the act, the existence and degree of suffering inflicted on the victim, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do6800, Sept. 24, 2009).

3) “Dangerous thing” includes any thing that can be widely used to harm a person’s life and body even if it is not a deadly weapon (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Do597, May 30, 1997). Whether a certain thing constitutes “Dangerous thing” ought to be determined depending on whether the other party or a third party could cause danger to a person’s life or body when using the thing in light of ordinary social norms (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do10256, Nov. 11, 2010).

4) Whether a certain act is justified as an act that does not contravene social norms, and the illegality is excluded, should be determined on an individual basis by considering the following specific circumstances: (i) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (ii) reasonableness of the means or method of the act; (iii) balance of the benefits of protection and infringement; (iv) urgency; and (v) supplementary nature that there is no other means or method other than the act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Do5077, Dec. 26, 2002; 2003Do300, Sept. 26, 2003).

5) The consent of the so-called victim whose illegality is excluded in accordance with Article 24 of the Criminal Act should not only be construed as the consent of the person who is legally able to dispose of his or her legal interest, but also not be contrary to the ethical and moral rules of society (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 85Do1892, Dec. 10, 1985).

C. Determination

1) Whether the principle of an indictment only is violated

Defendant A refers to Defendant A’s “self” and has N’s trainees, etc. absolutely

The phrase "person who has to obey" indicates the relationship between the above defendant and the victim by combining the statement "N's trainee". Since the above defendant is related to the motive and circumstance of assaulting the victim as stated in the facts charged, it does not constitute a violation of the principle of an indictment only with the above mentioned facts in the facts charged.

2) The contents of the motion picture of this case and whether it constitutes a special violence

A) Defendant A is the victim (the face of the trainee is not accurately recorded in the video).

다]에게 "너 뭐 하냐, 뭐 하고 있는 거야"라고 말하고, 피해자가 "진동을 무음으로 조정하고 있었습니다", "몇 시간 후에 풀릴지 정하는 게 있는데 그걸 정하고 있었습니다"라고 답하자, 위 피고인은 "야 이 미친년아 그걸 뭐 정하고 자빠졌어 언제 끝날지 모르는데 끝임 없이 잔머리야 저 썅년이 저거, 밖에 나가서 들어" 등의 욕설을 하면서 피해자를 2차례 밖으로 내보낸다.

나) 이후 위 피고인은 피해자를 N 안으로 들어오게 한 뒤 "뭘 반성했어, 무

슨 잔머리야, 대가리 박고 있을 동안 뭔 생각했어"라고 말하고, 피해자가 "핸드폰을 꺼낸 자체가 잘못이라고..."라고 답하자, 위 피고인은 "그렇게 많이 일깨워줘도 여태 뭐 한 거야", "제일 미련한 년이 몽둥이 맞고 욕먹는 년이야 이 썅년아" 등의 말을 한 다음, 손가락으로 왼쪽(동영상의 촬영방향을 기준으로 왼쪽을 말한다, 이하 같다) 방향을 가리키며 “몽둥이 가져 와"라고 말한다. 피해자가 동영상의 촬영장면 왼쪽 밖에서 목검 (위 피고인과 그 변호인들은 이를 '지휘봉'이라고 표현하고 있으나, 육안으로는 목검으로 보일 뿐이며, 위 피고인이 주장하는 목검과 지휘봉의 차이점을 발견하기 어렵다. 아래 2.의 다.의 4)의 나)항 참조. 가사, 전문적인 관점에서 목검이 아니라고 하더라도, 나무로 만들어지고 목검과 유사한 형태를 띠고 있어 목검으로 표현해도 무방한 것으로 보인다)를 가져오자, 위 피고인은 피해자로부터 위 목검을 건네받은 다음 이를 가지고 피해자의 머리, 다리 등 신체부위를 때린다. 위 피고인이 있는 힘껏 목검을 휘두른 것은 아니나, 그 강도가 그리 가볍지 않으며, 그 횟수는 39회에 달하고, 피해자가 맞으면서 아픈 듯 소리를 내거나(파일명 20180505_145317 동영상 중 30:36 부분) 신음을 참는 듯한 모습(위 동영상 중 30:43, 31:33 부분, 파일명 20180505_153930 동영상 중 01:14 부분 등)을 보이기도 한다.

C) The circumstances leading up to which Defendant A had the victim taken a postmortem examination as above, and the above Defendant A had the victim taken the postmortem examination.

Comprehensively taking account of the speech, behavior, method, frequency, attitude of the victim, etc., the above act of the defendant constitutes an unlawful use of force against the victim's body, and constitutes an assault. The neck used at the time constitutes "goods sufficient to injure the victim's body, which are dangerous in special assault crimes." It is determined that the above defendant had the intent of assault. Whether the victim was in the head of the plastic case, and whether the victim was in the body of the victim, whether the victim was in the body of the victim, or whether the victim was in the body of the victim, or whether the victim was in the body of the victim, does not affect the establishment of the assault crime.

3) Whether the act constitutes a justifiable act or a consent of the victim

A) The body of a female in the victim’s room and his residence immediately after the victim’s death

로 작성된 수첩 총 8권(이하 '피해자 수첩'이라고 한다)이 발견되었다. 피해자 수첩 중 2018. 5. 5.자 부분에는 “핸드폰 무음설정 (법문 시작 시) 잔머리 굴리는 것, 그렇게 살면 안 됨. 몇 시에 끝날 줄 알고??! ▷ 나의 생각: 애초에 핸드폰 쓸 일이 없는데 괜히 애착으로 챙긴 것이 잘못”이라는 기재(제5권 제307쪽)가 있다. 앞서 본 바와 같이 이 사건 동영상에도 피고인 A이 '휴대전화를 무음으로 조정하고 있었다'는 피해자의 말을 듣고서부터 본격적으로 욕설과 질책을 시작한 내용이 담겨 있는바, 피해자의 수첩 기재내용은 위 동영상의 내용에 정확히 부합한다. 이에 의하면, 위 피고인은 피해자가 법문강의에 집중하지 아니하고 핸드폰을 만지고 있는 점을 질책하기 위해 폭행을 한 것이다.

B) On the contrary, Defendant A and his defense counsel

In doing an act, such as viewing video, the victim was sweld with the victim at a minor time by using the command rod in order to discipline him, and the witness AT, AS, Defendant B, and D (including the case where Defendant B and D made a statement as a witness against Defendant A; hereinafter referred to as “Defendant B” and “Defendant D”) also made a statement to the same effect in this court. However, in light of the following circumstances, the above arguments and statements cannot be accepted. Also, the testimony of the same witness and the Defendants’ testimony cannot be viewed as a result of pre-conscing the speech for the purpose of hiding.

1. Defendant A was found to have no record of the victim at the beginning of the police investigation team.

When making a statement as a branch (the first police interrogation protocol of the defendant, etc. of the above defendant), the third police interrogation process of the interrogation of the suspect, which did not seem to have been judged as 'report', but the situation was judged as being appropriate for the victim when considering the situation. The same is when the victim was sent together with the bath theory. The same is when the victim was made prior to the beginning of the lecture, and the promise was not observed, and the statement was changed as ‘when it comes to a different time' (the third police interrogation protocol of the defendant, No. 700-701 of the above defendant). (The third police interrogation protocol of the defendant, No. 700-701 of the police interrogation protocol of the defendant, No. 301 of the above defendant), the defendant B, and D made a statement as follows: "When the victim first presented the above video and asked him to the defendant A," "When the victim was sent to the defendant," and "the defendant and the victim was exchanged with the defendant A and the victim" (the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant B, No. 365 and the police defendant.

② Defendant A was punished by a victim on May 5, 2018 when it was investigated by the prosecution.

에 대해 미안한 마음이고 개인적으로 잘못되었다'고 진술하면서도(제3권 제1868쪽, 제2067쪽) '피해자가 당시 발작을 일으켜 눈을 희번덕거리고 중얼거리고 옆 사람을 쿡쿡 찌르는 등 수업을 방해하여 체벌을 하였다'고 진술하여(제3권 제2035쪽 등), 경찰에서 진술하지 않았던 내용을 덧붙여 진술하였다. 피고인 B, C, D은 검찰에서 '피고인 A이 2018. 5. 5.경 피해자를 체벌하였다'고 진술하였고(제3권 제1834쪽, 제1892쪽, 제1947쪽 등), 이중 피고인 B는 제1회 검찰 조사에서 '피고인 A이 목검을 이용해서 피해자를 때린 적도 있지만 체벌의 개념이다. 피해자가 주위를 산만하게 해서 그런 것이다'라고 진술하였다(제2권 제1801쪽).

③ In the course of the investigation conducted in the same investigation agency as above, each of the Defendants is called “2018.”

5.5. At the time of the legal lecture, the statement was not made to the effect that the victim had done an act, such as making a obscenity and viewing obscenity images before the legal lecture, and the defendant merely stated to the effect that the victim made sexual reference, such as self-defense, etc., apart from the situation at the above point of time (No. 1797 pages). On the other hand, the defendant who was detained on March 30, 2019 in the instant case, responded to the above defendant's interview with the defendant A, who was detained on March 30, 201, that "I have no permanent address," and therefore, the above defendant is memoryed with the door that "I would be memory on May 5 at that time," and that the defendant did not memory the above situation, such as "No. 1797 pages?" and "No. 360 of the above case's answer" (No. 90).

④ However, AT, Defendant A, B, and D came into existence in this Court itself, May 2018.

5. At the time of the testimony, the victim made a statement with the assent of all the purport that “I wish to dial-a-a-a-the-counter (abababa)” and “IS,” and that I have shown obscenity images or that IS, etc. AS. In particular, I testified at this court on May 20, 2019, approximately two months after the victim visited A, as seen above, on May 5, 2018, as I testified, that I directly observed and memory specific facts, such as the fact that the victim had fladial-a-mail worn in the clothes.

⑤ AS makes a statement to the same effect as the above Defendants and ATS in this Court.

Defendant A made a statement to the effect that Defendant A gave 30 minutes of time for the abnormal behavior of the victim, such as the above, and even though it still did not have any reflectivity, Defendant A made a statement to the effect that “AS still did so.” On the other hand, it was not an atmosphere in which the victim came to see himself, and that the atmosphere was a long atmosphere, and Defendant A also made a statement that she was frightening the victim. Even when granting time of her deliberation, it is meaningful that Defendant A could be determined as “frightening the Defendant’s attitude expressed in the video without linking each other.”

6. As seen earlier, the victim’s pocket book on May 5, 2018

The contents of the video is not stated, and such circumstances do not appear at all in the video of this case.

C) If Defendant A points out the mistake of the victim, what is the opportunity for Defendant A to commit assault,

In that he/she committed assault, it can be deemed that the act of the above defendant goes beyond the limit of the appropriate method or means for the discipline under the social norms, and it cannot be deemed that there was no other means or methods other than the act. Therefore, the defendant A's assertion in this part is without merit, in light of the following: (a) the above defendant had already been punished for other reasons, including the developments leading up to the assault, the behavior of the above defendant, the behavior of the above defendant, and his/her speech, the manner, and the frequency of the assault; and (b) the victim who went out of the Republic of Korea did not make any other mistake; and (c) the victim who went out of the Republic of Korea did not have any other mistake; and (d) he/she committed an assault by taking the bath to other people (aS was a student's wife).

D) On the other hand, even if the mother of the victim, the victim gave the defendant A a decoration and education for the victim.

Even if the victim asked the assault, it cannot be said that the method of using the assault was acceptable as above, and the victim’s mother does not have the right to consent to the victim’s physical legal interests. In addition, there is no evidence that the victim consented to the assault of the above defendant, and even if the victim consented to the assault of the above defendant, the consent to the above degree of assault is invalid as it goes against social rules. Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion that it is an act by the victim’s consent is without merit.

2. Judgment on the charge of special assault by Defendant A

A. Defendant A’s assertion

① Defendant A merely called 's external public relations, etc.' but did not appear from N to be called 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's'. ② At the time of the instant case, the victim was not only N' but also a 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's', and there was no fact that Defendant A did not commit continuous physical violence against the victim. ③ At around September 16, 2018, there was no fact that the victim was 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's' 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's ' 's 's 's ' ' '.

(b) Relevant legal principles;

Recognition of guilt in a criminal trial may lead a judge to make a reasonable doubt.

If there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction, the interests of the defendant should be determined even if there is doubt that the defendant is guilty. However, such doubt does not necessarily have to be formed by direct evidence, but is formed by indirect evidence as long as it does not violate the empirical and logical rules. Even if indirect evidence does not have full probative value as to the crime individually, if it is deemed that there is a comprehensive probative value that does not exist independent evidence in relation to the crime, it can be recognized as criminal facts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do14263, Feb. 25, 2010). And, the term “reasonable doubt” in this context refers to a reasonable doubt as to the probability of facts inconsistent with the facts that are favorable to the defendant based on logical and empirical rules, and such indirect evidence is not necessarily formed by direct evidence, and can also be formed by indirect evidence. 207Do14263, Feb. 25, 2010).

C. Determination

Defendant A did not have any direct evidence that assaulted the victim around 17:54-19:09 on September 16, 2018. However, comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances revealed based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it may be recognized that Defendant A, who continuously assaulted the victim, committed an assault by N from September 16, 2018 to 17:54-19:09 on September 16, 2018.

1) N’s history and training contents and the Defendants’ roles

A) N has been opened by Defendant A around November 1997, and Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government M buildings 4 since it was opened by Defendant A

The traditional martial arts hall is operated on the floor. N has mainly conducted the training such as "astronomical Personnel", "Sacheon", "Sacheon Circulation", "Sacheon Circulation", "SaU", "SaU", "SaU", "SaU", "SaU", "SaV", "SaV", and each Triday and Triday (10:30-11:30-20:30) and SaV training (15:0-1700-17000 each week.

B) Defendant B was engaged in N training from around 2002 to Defendant A around the end of 2002.

The president has been on board and served as the president from around five years ago, and has been residing within N (Article 1791, Article 1975 of the Evidence Records, unless otherwise mentioned, '○○' and '○○' mean the number or pages on the evidence records of the prosecution). Defendant C opened the passage of N in 2 to 2 to 3 months in 2000 after leaving the call for about seven to eight years, and Defendant D played a role of teaching other trainees from around 2013 to around the time of the instant case (Article 3: 182-1823, 182 of the Evidence Records, 182).

2) The circumstances in which Defendant A, who was disadvantageous to N, or who was called “NN” from N’s president, instructors, and trainees, demanded their absolute obeyions.

A) Around September 16, 2018, documents were posted within N around September 16, 2018 (No. 80-81, 580-581 of title 5). Of them, one of the following was written: (a) training programs, such as “AW”, and the target time for N trainees’ respective training activities, such as AX, AS, AT, and Defendant D (hereinafter referred to as “documents of training programs”); and (b) under the title of “Nggging law”, the other chapter was written as “Wnging” (hereinafter referred to as “documents of training programs”); and (c) the other section was written as “21”, i.e., the thickness., “S.”

B) Defendant B, around April 2017, told X that “Isn't d't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn't sn'

C) A video file recorded by Defendant A’s outward, etc., of the legal lectures that Defendant A had progress.

In this respect, according to the pages appearing in the video file No. 3, the above defendant continued to name 's own 's 's 's 's 's 's 's '',' and the victim 's 's 's 's 's f' 's 's 's 's f' according to the f' match (see Article 733-742 of title 2).

(d) a voice file in the title, “for cream purposes,” stored in the Nbrid, to the creamO.

(hereinafter referred to as "audio file", No. 2, No. 769, No. 8-1, etc.) also means that Defendant A refers to a 's own 's 's 's 's 's 's' or 's 's 's' or 's 's 's 's 's', and translation of 's 's 's 's 's' into 's 's 's' into 's 's '', 's 's 's 's 's '' and 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's '

E) From September 6, 2018 to September 14, 2018, between 09:51 to 19:30, and Defendant A

Defendant D sent a message to Defendant D with the content that he would have ordered Defendant D to process the speech by no later than a certain time, such as ‘D', ‘D', ‘D', ‘D', and ‘D' to treat the death by no later than 10 times. On this, Defendant D continued to transmit a crime of unsatoning. I will continue to know. I will we will know. I will further do we will you you will you you you will refer to Defendant A as ‘saton' and sent a lot of messages (see Title 623-632 of the first right) that seem to commit the crime of unsatoning that Defendant A was not treated in a timely manner.

F) Defendant B, C, and witness AT, etc., and release on bail after Defendant A was detained in the instant case.

Until release, the above Defendant A continued interview. During this process, Defendant A reported N's situation, etc. from Defendant B, C, and AT, and instructed the organization of arguments, delivery of documents, and recruitment of applications or written confirmations related to the trial. In particular, Defendant A and C, who failed to properly ascertain the horses of Defendant B and C, was charged with the above two defendants at a large cost, and the above two defendants showed a positive attitude without any particular resistance to Defendant A's quality (the first 311 No. 637, 640 pages, etc.).

G) Defendant B stated that “A’s life was “A’s life” when the Defendant directly confrontationed with the Defendant A.

Defendant A et al. also referred to as “A’s livelihood” in this court, and all the Defendants asserted that “A’s livelihood was not “B,” but “A’s livelihood.” However, Defendant B stated that “A” was a witness of the first incident immediately after the victim’s death (the first protocol of statement) and “I’s personal identity or personal identity” in the process of the second witness investigation (the second protocol of statement No. 386) that “A’s personal identity was used to read “A’s personal identity” (the second police interrogation protocol) and “A’s personal identity was used to read “A’s personal identity” and “A’s personal identity was not the same during the first prosecutor’s inquiry, but the same was the same as Defendant A’s personal identity and personal identity, and the second witness’s personal identity was not the same as Defendant C’s personal identity, and the latter was not the same as Defendant C’s personal identity, but the latter was the same as Defendant C’s personal name and the latter’s personal identity was not the same as Defendant C’s personal identity.

3) The victim continued to accompany N from around 2015 to the time of death and Defendant A

The circumstances in which the defendant A was demanded to pay a legal translation or additional membership fee, etc., and the defendant A was absolutely subject to such demand.

A) The victim did not visit the N for a period of time after attending several months before a year.

가, 2015년경부터 본격적으로 N을 다니기 시작하였다. 피해자의 어머니인 W가 피해자에게 N 회비 명목으로 돈을 대주다가 2017. 4월경부터 이를 중단하려 하자(실제로 2017. 3. 28.까지는 피해자의 신한은행 계좌에 'AY' 이름으로 돈이 주기적으로 입금되다가 그 후부터는 위와 같은 입금이 이루어지지 아니하였다, 순번 2 계좌거래내역 참조), 피해자는 유리병을 던져 깨뜨리는 등으로 거칠게 행동하였다. 이에 피해자의 남동생인 X는, 피해자와 W의 갈등이 심하여 당분간 떨어져 지내야겠다는 생각에 2017. 7월경 W로부터 분가하여 서울 동대문구 AZ(이하 생략)에서 피해자와 함께 거주하기 시작하였다(위 거주지를 이하 '피해자의 거주지'라 한다). W는 'N을 그만 다니라 했을 때부터 애(피해자)가 거칠어졌다'고 진술하였고, X는 '이전에는 (피해자가) 유리병을 던지는 등의 거친 행동을 한 적이 없다, 분위기 자체가 공격적이지 않은 집안인데, 유리병을 깼다는 것 자체가 너무 충격이었고 놀랐다'고 진술하였다.

(B) the victim’s pocket book was prepared in the form of a day, and the account transfer details, and the record of card use;

N 외장하드에 저장된 동영상 등 객관적 증거에 부합하는 기재들5)을 비롯하여, 피해자가 직접 경험한 내용을 토대로 작성한 것으로 보이는 구체적이고도 현실적인 내용들이 상당수 기재되어 있어 신빙성이 높다.6) 피해자 수첩 중에는 "한 달에 백오십만 원(백~ 백삼십)(*비+용돈)", "계속 돈 달라고 조르기"라는 기재와 함께 "완전히 다른 인간이 되었구나! 할 정도로", "최악으로 꾀죄죄하게", "소주 한 병, 막걸리 머리에서 부어 발끝까지 붓기", "☆ 말도 안 되는 황당함", "서울역, 화장실 잠, 기도원", "완전 미친 척", "익명 112 신고(BA)", "공부하는 모습 보이지 않기" 등의 기재가 있는데(제5권 제333쪽), 피해자 수첩 내에서의 위치상 해당 기재는 2017. 3. 26.경부터 2017. 5. 3.경까지 사이 불상의 일자에 작성된 것으로 보인다. 앞서 보았듯 W가 2017. 4월경부터 N 회비를 대주지 않으려 하자 피해자가 유리병을 던지는 등 기존에 보이지 않던 거친 행동을 하였던 사정을 보태어 보면, 피해자는 W로 하여금 N 회비 명목으로 계속하여 돈을 대주게 하려는 목적에서 의도적으로 정신적인 문제가 있는 것처럼 W, X 등에게 과격한 행동을 한 것으로 보인다. 그 무렵인 2017. 4월경 앞서 본 바와 같이 피고인 A, B는 피해자의 남동생인 X와 통화를 하였는데, 이 때 피고인 B는 '피해자가 BB를 들어가려고 하는데, 본인들의 말을 피해자가 들으니까 N에 안정적으로 회비를 낼 것을 약속하면 본인들이 BB에서 피해자를 데리고 오겠다'는 취지의 말을 하였다.

C) Examining the account details (No. 2) of the new bank account transactions in the name of the victim, on December 2015.

10,000 won has been continuously transferred from September 10, 2018 to the bank account under the name of the above defendant, and in particular, from June 2017 to November 10 of the same year, 160,000 won each month, and from July 11, 2018, 17 to August 12, 2018, and 170,000 won each of the above documents were transferred to the above defendant's account in light of the following circumstances: 30,00 won each of the above documents were transferred from the victim's account to the above defendant's account; 200,000 won each of the above documents were transferred from the victim's account to the defendant's account; 30,000 won each of the above documents were transferred from the victim's account to the defendant's account; 30,000 won each of the above documents were not the defendant's money transfer from the victim's account to the defendant's account.

D) The documents of the training content as seen earlier are as follows: “O-Woo (victims)-Woo-Woo (10 minutes for each of them)-Woo-Woo

(15 minutes), 10 minutes, and AU (5 minutes) are written. Examining the part corresponding to the victim’s pocket book, in particular, from May to September 2018, the above part of the victim’s pocket book, including the contents as seen in the above (b) and the contents such as N’s actions, demands and books related to N’s English translation, Defendant B, C, and AT, and the word “N’s book” continues to appear. As seen above, Defendant A, etc. provided that “N’s match must be followed by the victim,” that “N’s daily work should be fritered at the time of No. 133,” that “N’s daily work should be made to the victim,” and that “N’s daily work should be made to be made to the victim, including the victim’s voice, and that the victim’s voice and the victim’s voice should be used within 20 years prior to the victim’s promise.”

E) On May 2016, 2016 to AD, the victim of which is a named victim BC, who has a satisfy at a training meeting.

22. From April 1, 2014 to November 28, 2017, the message written by Internet address (URL) connected to the images of “BD guide image” was sent, and around July 11, 2016, the message was sent, respectively, to the effect that the NJ and AI will invite the attendance of the NNJ (Law No. 1320) (No. 306 No. 205, No. 318). The foregoing message was excluded from each of the above messages, the most part of the AH and AI messages between the victim and AD between the victim and the victim:

(1) The message that asked AD to ask questions, etc. that the victim had in the process outside of the course of study, ② the message that AD referred to the husband’s decision to participate in the BC life training, ③ other ordinary dialogues, and the victim did not find any message that mentions a third-party arts organization, etc. in addition to N.

Around September 10, 2018, the victim immediately before the death, expressed to the effect that he would be present at the N legal tender of the Saturdays. During this process, the victim mentioned "Ninn't refer to "Isn't have to see that Isn't have to do so, and that Isn't have to sn't have to sn't have to sn't have to sn't this part of what kind of portion? (Now 315 No. 1302 et al.).

F) X, the victim’s South-North Easter X, is the victim’s n’s uniform in that court.

At least two to three months prior to translation of N's law, the victim stated that "I would like to know why I would like to know," "I would like to know," "I would like to know, at that time, I would like to know," and "I would like to know, I would like to know," "I would like to know, I would like to know," "I would like to know, at that time, I would like to have been working for the first time in BE within the Seoul Special Metropolitan City office from March 2, 2018 to September 14, 2018, and I would like to find that I would like to have been working for the first time in the telephone conversation of the above BE BF prosecutor, who had been working for the victim at the time, and that I would like to have known that I would like to have been working for the victim at least 1 to 20 days after the date of translation, and that I would like to know that I would like to have been working for the victim at least 1 to 30 days after translation.

4) Defendant A’s physical violence committed against N trainees, including the victim

Determination

A) In the victim’s pocket book, in particular, related parts 7 related to the victim’s pocket book, there are a considerable number of indications that the victim himself/herself was 's 'N' from 'N, another trainee (Defendant D, AT, etc.), or that 'N' was 'N' or 'N' was fright, etc. He/she mentioned. On May 5, 2018, the victim was subject to the Defendant A’s assault. As seen earlier, the victim’s pocket book did not clearly indicate that he/she was fry against the above date, and only self-based nature was approved. This means that there was a violence that was committed under the pretext of the victim’s pocket, and that the victim was sexually committed, and that it was 'the victim was frighted due to the mistake of the victim'.

B) Examining the images stored in NFE, Defendant A around May 5, 2018

It is confirmed that the image of the 5th body of Defendant A (hereinafter referred to as “the 5th body of Defendant A”) taken a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a shot of a s.

C) Defendant A around June 18, 2016, up to N in N, “the year to the lower end”, and confirmations

그냥, 몽둥이 가져와"라고 말하는 장면이 담긴 영상, 위 피고인이 2017. 4. 1.경 피해자 등에게 수련동작을 가르치는 중간에 피고인 D의 머리를 목검으로 치는 장면을 촬영한 영상, 피고인 A이 2018. 1. 20.경 법문강의 중 "잘못했을 때 회초리를 들 땐 들어야 돼. (중략) 너희들은 매 때리면 지랄발광하지. 이 종자들은, 고소 안 하면 다행이지" 등으로 말하는 장면을 촬영한 영상, 위 피고인이 2018. 3. 17.경 "쟤는 동호회 수업해야지, 회사 일 해야지, 여기 수련 나와야지, 돈 구하러 다녀야지, 두드려 맞아야지, 그걸 보고도 못 느껴 얼마나 니가 편한지. 니가 제일 편해, N에서 (중략) 얘는 죽을 맛 보고, 나이 50 중반에 야자 소리 들어가면서, 빠따 맞아가면서" 등의 말을 하는 장면이 촬영된 영상 등이 존재한다(제2권 제732~738쪽, 제790쪽 참조).

D) In the process of communicating with X around April 2017, Defendant A has been able to restore to a sloping.

D. In this sense, there was an error that (for the first time) she was less than 1000 o.00 o.00 o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.,

E) The police officer's physical examination of Defendant D around October 3, 2018, and the police officer's escape from the father, such as the result of the examination of the body of Defendant D.

In addition, the witness 2 stated to the effect that the blood transfusions (No. 311) on the side side of the upper and rear side of the relative and both sides of the relative and the front and rear side of the two sides were confirmed. In this regard, the witness 2 stated to the effect that “the blood transfusions (No. 1st right) on the upper side of the side of the relative, etc. has a large form of secondary blood transfusions, and that the said blood transfusions were generated by the instant wooden autopsy, but it is not unreasonable to say that the blood transfusions were generated by the said wooden autopsy.” In addition, the Defendant D’s cellular phone contains active photographs of the lower side of the mari, etc. (No. 624st right, etc.).

F) Defendants, AT, AS, etc. all assaulted within N except on May 5, 2018 and 5.

However, it is difficult to believe that there was no statement to the effect that there was no assault or assault, or that it was inevitable during training, in light of the above facts. However, it appears that there was no assault or assault itself, but it was a false statement that was conducted in collusion with a view to seeing the speech.

5) In addition to N around 2018, the victim did not appear in the State-designated design or religious organization.

or N, the circumstances in which it is not possible to find any place or matter that may be used for assault except N.

A) The details of each transfer to the account under Defendant A’s name and the regular withdrawal of card payments

Exclusion from gold content, there is no fact that the amount exceeding KRW 100,000 from the new bank account in the name of the victim prior to December 10, 2015 to September 2018 exceeds KRW 100,000 on a regular basis for at least one month, and in particular, from June 2018 to September 201, the details of withdrawal exceeding KRW 10,000 from the said new bank account cannot be found.

B) As seen earlier, the victim worked in BE within the Seoul Office from March 2, 2018 to September 14, 2018. At that time, the victim was 08:00 to 10:00 on a Saturday (No. 324,325) and the victim was 3:0 on a day from March 2, 2018 to 3:3:0 on a day from September 2, 2018, from around 200 to around 28:3:0 on a day from September 14, 2018, the victim was 1 to 3:0 on a day from around 20:3:0 on a day from around 15, 2018 to around 20:3:0 on a day from around 20:3:00 on a day from September 2, 2018, the victim was employed as an instructor of the above apartment school, and the victim was 1 to 28:37:16:27.

C) T (T) transportation cards used by the victim from January 1, 2018 to September 16, 2018

Examining the details of the use (No. 320) of the Act, there is no regular and almost few changes in the victim’s conduct, as seen below, and there is almost little traces of moving to other places except for the movement related to the office of Seoul Metropolitan Government and private teaching institutes, extracurricular lessons, and N activities.

(1) With respect to BE services in Seoul Office: The victims shall be Saturdays, Sundays, and cooperation from March 2, 2018.

On May 15, 2018, 2018. from July 25, 2018 to August 9, 2018.), almost every day, excluding the date it is confirmed that the day and work status were taken off and injured leave (on August 9, 2018., etc., the day taken off from the BJ Station, the subway station, the neighboring subway station, the neighboring subway station, the victim’s domicile, and took off from the 07:20-07:50 Viewing station, and he again took off from the viewing station at around 11:15 before and after the 111:15.

(2) In relation to the work of a fish driving school: The victim shall periodically be from January 5, 2018 to BK.

From March 2, 2018, in particular, from around 11:15 to around 12:00 to around 17:30-18:30 to around 18:30 to around 12:0, a person was boarding in the viewing station and 11:30 to around 11:30.

(3) Regarding extracurricular lessons: ① From July 21, 2018 to August 11, 2018, the extracurricular lessons are provided.

BH was lowered at a bus stop near a luminous city, such as BM and BN, after the victim was set off from the GL bus in the U.S., but it was confirmed that the details of the car going to the KV again from approximately 2 to 3 hours to the GV station in the neighboring bus stops were confirmed. The victim was set off at the BN bus stops around 20:49 on August 31, 2018, after getting off a taxi at around 00:19 on September 1, 2018, which was the following day after getting off the taxi, around 00:02 on that day. ② The victim was set off at the JV station near the victim’s residence on August 17, 2018 to September 14, 2018, but was excluded from the FO and the FO on September 28, 2018.

(4) With respect to extracurricular lessons: A victim on August 22, 2018, from the date of demand, 2018

9. By no later than 15 and Saturdays, the date of demand for each week and Saturdays (excluding September 1, 2018), the bus stops from the subway station located in the subway station located in the subway station located in approximately nine minutes in the Do newsletter from the apartment complex, or moves from the high-speed terminal station to the above apartment bus nearby the apartment complex, such as "N apartment", "BR", and the bus stops from the bus stops, such as around 3 to 4 hours after the subway station, "BP station", and "BR", and the bus stops, such as the bus ice ice ice 339 hours after getting a bus from the bus stops or from the high-speed terminal station to the subway station (see, e.g., cruise 339 hours).

(5) Regarding the extracurricular lessons of BI apartment: On September 1, 2018, the victim was aboard the subway on the same day from the 09:49 to the subway station on September 1, 2018, the victim was getting out of the subway station in the 09:02 BJ Station, and then getting out of the bus station "BI apartment" to the BS bus station. On the same day, around 11:52 of the same day, the victim was boarding the subway station in the BTS station, which was not far away from BI. In addition, on September 15, 2018, the victim was getting out of the subway station in the BJ station and getting out of the subway station in the 09:25 BT station on the same day, 11:54 of the same day "BI apartment" bus stops from the bus stops to the subway station (see 332 of the same day).

(6) The details that appear to be related to N: On a regular basis, the victim may periodically, and on February 2018.

5.부터는 거의 예외 없이, 매주 화·목·토요일 N 인근 지하철역인 R역, BU역 또는 BV 역(이하 위 세 역을 통틀어 'R역 등'이라 한다)에서 승·하차하였다. 해당 승·하차 시간대를 살펴보면, 화요일 및 목요일에는 R역 등에서 10:00~10:30 사이에 하차하여 11:30~12:30 무렵에 승차하거나 18:00~19:00 무렵에 하차하여 21:30~22:30 무렵에 승차하였고(2018. 3월경부터는 후자와 같은 저녁시간대의 승·하차내역이 대부분이다), 토요일에는 다소 유동적이나 R역 등에서 늦어도 13:30 무렵에는 하차하여 저녁 늦은 시간에 승차하였다. 위 승·하차 시간대가 앞서 본 N의 수련시간(화·목요일 오전 수련 10:30~11:30, 화·목요일 저녁 수련 19:30~20:30, 토요일 법문강의 15:00~17:00)에 대체로 들어맞는 점, 앞서 본 바와 같이 피해자 유족 등의 진술, 피해자의 주거지 및 피해자가 사용한 PC, 피해자 수첩 기재, 피해자 명의 계좌거래내역 등에서 N과 연관된 흔적이 다수 존재하는 점에 비추어 보면, 위와 같은 승·하차내역은 피해자의 N 활동과 관련된 것이라 봄이 상당하다. 한편 피해자는 2018. 4월부터 매월 첫째 주 토요일에는 R역 등 대신 시청역에서 하차하였는데, 앞서 보았듯이 피해자 수첩 중 2018. 6. 2.자(첫째 주토요일이다) 부분에 " ☆ 반성: 시청강론 늦음 → 원장님도 안 계신데 BW 선생님 혼자 준비하시다가 비디오 녹화를 못함", "강론(BW 선생님)"라는 기재가 존재하는 점, 당시, 피해자와 피고인 D 모두 서울시청에서 근무한 점 등에 비추어 보면, 위 하차내역 역시N 활동과 관련된 것으로 보인다.

(7) Contents that appear to be related to N: A victim in January and 4-5 of 2018

The second Saturday (2018. 10. 10. 10. ; March 10, 2018; June 9, 2018; July 14, 2018; August 11, 2018; and September 8, 2018) 08:0-08:30,000 to September 8, 2018. The victim appears to be the victim of the village in light of the fact that the contents of the training are indicated as the “catation: Topat and Jindo-do” (No. 5. 81; No. 298). The victim appears to be the victim of the village in accordance with the following facts: the victim appears to be the victim of the village in the first Saturday: the victim's attendance at the meeting of September 8, 2018 (No. 5. 131).

(8) In light of the above details of the boarding and unloading, the aggrieved person generally within any subway station.

A bus stops at 20: B. 1: A bus stops at 1:20 on January 4, 2018, at 2018, the victim's walked at 1:3:0 on the same bus stops at 1:5:0 on the same bus stops at 1:0 on the same bus stops at 1:5:0 on the same bus stops at 2:0 on the same bus stops at 1:5:0 on the same bus stops at 1:0 on the same bus stops at 2:0 on the same bus stops at 1:0 on the same bus stops at 1:0 on the same bus stops:3:0 on the same bus stops at 2:0 on the same bus stops at 1:0 on the same 1:5:0 on the same bus stops at 2:0 on the same bus stops at 1:0 on the same bus stops at 1:0 on the same 1:0 on the same day, the victim's last bus at 2:0 on the same bus stops at 1:6:0 on the same day without exception.

D) Mobile phones used by the victim from April 2018 to September 16, 2018 (BY)

Reviewing the monetary details (Evidence No. 264) Do, the address of the radio station of the call transmitted from the above mobile phone is ① neighboring the victim’s residence (Seoul Dongdaemun-gu BZdong), ② neighboring the Seoul Metropolitan Government Office (Seoul Jung-gu, Seoul, Seoul, 10 Do 15, Do 25, Do 204, Do 204, Do 204, Do 2000, Do 2000, 2000, 2000, 2000, 2000, 300,000,000,000: 20,000,000,000: 30,000,000,000,000: 20,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,00,00: 20,00).

On the other hand, in light of the above monetary content, the victim is the defendant A (CI), the defendant C (CJ), the defendant

D (CK) and AT (CL), each of which has been exchanged with telephone or text, respectively, over several times, and in particular, it is confirmed that the number of telephone or text messages has been transmitted in several times with Defendant B (CM and CN). Other than Defendants and AT, it is difficult to find persons who have given and received telephone or text messages from the victim to several times during the above period.

E) From March 16, 2018 to March 2018, 2018.

9. Examining the settlement details of 16. 16. (CS, CTS, and CU), most of the settlement details that do not exceed KRW 10,000 and KRW 60,00,00 are daily details such as the main contents of Eart (COS, CP, etc.) in Eart, the details of meals in the division of food, etc. (CP, 'CR', convenience stores, etc.) and the details of the use of the PC for the PC, and the name of the franchise store (CS, 'CTS', 'CU', etc.) do not go beyond the aforementioned victim's active scope.

F) During the victim’s pocket book, the terms “A”, “BA” (No. 5 No. 333), and “AV”

로 인해 망한(중략) 집안사람들"(2018. 6. 25.자, 제5권 제286쪽), "끊임없이 N과 다른 수련단체를 비교하고, 내가 어느 쪽으로 가야 가장 편히 귀한 것을 많이 얻을 수 있는지 계산한다"(2018. 5. 30.자, 제5권 제295쪽), "CW 선생님 선거 전에 만나러 가자!"(2018. 6. 2.자, 제5권 제299쪽), "CX 연습을 그때 했으므로 ⇒ 이제 한 선생님 만 나러 가도 된다?"(작성일자불상, 제5권 제311쪽), "CY 선생님, 스승님 두 분 다 N에서 열심히 일하는 게 옳다고 했는데도 속으로 갈등하고"(2018. 8. 29.자, 제5권 제129쪽) 등의 기재가 있다. 피해자가 2016. 9. 28.경 CY 명의의 계좌로 226,000원을 이체한 내역(제1권 제43쪽), 피고인 D과 CY의 대화내용(변호인 제출 증거 순번 16 녹취록) 등에 비추어 보면 피해자가 과거에 CX 내지 CY과 관련되었을 가능성도 보이기는 한다. 피고인 A 및 그 변호인들은 이를 토대로, 사건 무렵 피해자가 N 관계자 이외의 제3자를 만났을 가능성이 있으며, 그 과정에서 피해자의 사체에서 발견된 피하출혈이 CV 등 종교단체에서의 안수기도 그밖에 제3자에 의해 발생하였을 가능성을 주장한다. 다른 피고인들과 증인 AT 등도, 2018. 5. 5.경을 제외하고는 피고인 A이 피해자를 때린 적이 전혀 없으며, 피해자가 평소에 BB, 기도원, 굿당, 법당 등에 대해 언급하였다면서 피고인 A의 주장에 부합하는 취지로 진술하였다.

However, the witness X and AD correspond, and the victim has been a item test in the Section.

It stated to the effect that the victim does not memory on the basis of the stories, such as CV, CZ, BB, CV, and CV, etc. The message actually sent and received from AD does not mention any place other than N. A. In this court, the witness W stated that the victim had shown that he had shown that he had shown that he had shown that he had shown several times before the victim entered an elementary school (CZ) and that he had shown that he had shown that he had shown that he would not memory. The time mentioned ‘CV' in the victim’ in the victim’ book, ‘CW’, ‘CW seafarer’, etc. is 1 month prior to the date of the victim’s death, and ‘CV’ is 30 days prior to the date of the victim’s death, and that the “CV’ in the context of ‘CV’ intentionally evaluate the people' as a religion (CV) and that the victim would not be able to say that he had any more mental problem, such as the victim’s fee 20 days prior to the victim’s entrance.

In addition to the transfer details of September 28, 2016, the data that the victim provided money to CX or CY. While examining the record, CY does not specifically state the victim's whether the victim was satisfy in the last year, and the date, time, place, and circumstances when the victim met. This does not mean that the date and time of death seems to have been at a considerable interval of not less than one year, even if the victim was satisfy between some organizations, and raising the possibility that the victim was satisfyd in other religious organizations or art organizations around 2018 is merely a doubt based on conceptually and extremely abstract possibility that the victim might have been satisfyed. Furthermore, in light of the above circumstances, the Defendants' statements on the video of this case and the statements on the day of the victim's death and the statements on the victim's death cannot be accepted in light of the credibility that the Defendants' statements on March 2, 2019 and the above statements on March 3, 2019.

6) The circumstances in which the victim was assaulted by a postmortem examination, etc. within two weeks from the date of death, and there are circumstances under which he/she could be subject to his/her masse from the Defendant A, and that he/she could not find any place or issue other than N.

(A)in the course of the autopsy and autopsy of the body immediately after the victim’s death; and

광범위한 피하출혈과 그 양쪽 가장자리(양쪽 옆구리 위치)의 두 줄 출혈, ② 오른쪽 위 팔 앞·뒤쪽과 아래팔 뒤쪽 및 왼쪽 위팔 뒤쪽의 피하출혈, 특히 오른쪽 아래팔 바깥쪽과 자뼈 쪽 및 왼쪽 위팔 안쪽의 두 줄 출혈, ③ 양쪽 허벅지 앞쪽의 선상 피하출혈과 그 각 가장자리 및 허벅지 바깥쪽의 두 줄 출혈, ④ 오른쪽 귀 뒤쪽 및 목 오른쪽의 두 줄 피하출혈(이 부분 출혈을 이하 '이 사건 중선출혈'이라 한다), ⑤ 왼쪽 윗눈꺼풀 전반의 피하출혈과 윗눈꺼풀 바깥쪽 선상 표피박탈 및 왼쪽 아랫눈꺼풀 바깥쪽의 출혈, ⑥ 왼쪽 귓바퀴 안쪽의 피하출혈, ⑦ 후두부 전반의 희미한 붉은색 피하출혈 등 손상이 확인되었다. 두 줄 출혈(중선출혈)은 가늘고 긴 물체가 피부에 접촉하면서 피하연부조직의 혈액이 양쪽 가장자리로 밀려나는 현상을 말한다. 부검의인 Z은 위와 같은 사체 손상 등을 토대로 '출혈과 근육 손상이 전신적인 이상을 초래하였으며 그 과정에서 피해자가 사망에 이르렀을 것'이라면서 피해자의 사망원인을 압궤증후군으로 판단하였고, 법의학교수인 증인 AE, AF도 이 법정에서 '피해자의 사망원인을 외상성 쇼크 등으로 표현하는 것이 보다 적절하다고 생각하나, 광범위한 근육 손상과 출혈이 사망의 원인이 되었다는 점에서는 압궤증후군이라는 표현이 틀렸다고 할 수는 없다'는 취지로 진술하였다.

B) With respect to the blood confirmed in the body of the victim, 1 The witness Z shall be entitled to this law.

In several times, the majority opinion stated to the effect that ‘the blood relative is relatively new, and that the physical damage that has a significant impact on the death will have occurred within one week from the date of death,' and that ‘the physical damage that has a significant impact on the death will have occurred within one week from the date of death', and that ‘the (time at which the death occurred) if the general two weeks period expires, it is difficult to see it as the body, so the (time at which the death occurred) will not exceed two weeks from the date of death.' (2) Although the witness who has a new blood relative is presumed to have recently, it is not possible to accurately determine the time, it is clear that it is within two weeks from the date of death, and it was assumed that (the date of death) the body damage that has a significant impact on the death would have occurred within one week from the date of death, the witness made a statement to the effect that ‘the possibility that it would have occurred within seven days from the date of death' and that it was difficult to make the statement that it had been made as ‘the one'.

In full view of the above, it is reasonable to view that the blood transfusion confirmed in the victim's body was within two weeks from the date of the victim's death.

C) As seen earlier, the injured party’s usual conduct for several months before the date of death.

The defendant, other than the defendant A, periodically remitted money exceeding KRW 100,00 to a specific person, and only consumed daily within the extent not exceeding KRW 60,000. Such Rule-based lifestyles remain as they are within two weeks from the date of the victim's death (i.e., from September 3, 2018 to September 16, 2018), and it is confirmed that the victim took place in R, etc. for every hour according to N Training Hours or the Law. (8) The victim's place of work, etc., Seoul City Office, place of work, place of extracurricular, and place of work, and place other than N. 2. The victim, during the above period, may not be able to find out any trace between the victim's daily life and place of work, and the victim's daily life, especially those of the defendant B, and those of the victim's daily life, from around 136, 2018 to 36, respectively.

D) Meanwhile, the victim died. On September 4, 2018, 2018, 6th day of the same month, 8th day of the same month, 11th day of the same month, 13th day of the same month and 15th day of the same month respectively, and Defendant A was also N on the 11th day of the same month. From among the victim’s pocketbooks, the victim was able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have been able to have ever.

E) The witness Z reflects on the body of the victim(victim) in this Court.

D. Although it is not appropriate to say that the above postmortem examination took place, it is possible to see that the above postmortem examination took place, and, in view of the shape or length of the body, whether there is no possibility of seeing the body of the defense counsel as an upper part of the body rather than a solid substance such as a shotning examination, etc., the 'explosive body' of the defense counsel is increased, and as a material cause of fluent rice, the shot, such as damage caused to the body of the changed person, the body of the body of the changed person, etc. The witness E and AF made a statement to the effect that it conforms to the above flusium, and in particular, AF made a statement to the effect that it is possible to conclude that the flusent body of the victim would have taken place the body of the victim, and that the flusium itself should have been kept in the form of flusium in the immediately preceding 15th body of the victim.'s body of this case.

F) In light of the statements of DB (see, e.g., order 261), the statements of BF, which were the Director of the Korean Language Institute at the time of the instant case, the statements of students who received English and extracurricular lessons from the victim, and the statements of AD connecting the victim immediately before the victim’s death, etc., the victim cannot be deemed to have been abused with any tool that could cause arbitrarious transfusion from the e.g., language teaching institutes, Seoul Office, and English and extracurricular teaching places. Ultimately, there is no place where such assault was committed is located only N.

G) The witness Z is not entitled to speak in the present law, but the scope of damage is broad.

It is extremely difficult to see the body damage of the victim (victim) as the location of the middle blood relative is not the position of the victim easily, but it is extremely difficult to see the body damage of the victim. Rather, the damage to the outside of the arms, etc. was similar to that of the defensive trace, and thus, it was supported by others. The witness AE and AF also stated to the effect that the victim may not have any possibility of self-exploiting the blood relative to the extent that it was caused by the victim. The victim committed an act of booming the head on the wall in the influence of 2018 before the 2018, and made a statement to the effect that it was difficult to see the victim's eye. However, there was no possibility that the victim's eye was in a hole in the eye of the victim (the witness X's legal statement, evidence No. 14-15). However, the victim's main damage with the causal relation to the victim's death during the middle blood transfusion confirmed immediately after the death is not related to the above part.

7) The instant middle blood transfusion is the upper part of the victim’s building that had not existed before entering the N, and was caused by assault.

A) In the case of the instant middle blood relative, the location and scope, and colors of the said middle blood relative shall be considered.

In addition, not only other persons but also the victim himself/herself can be sufficiently aware of his/her head. AE also stated to the effect that "in the case of this case's middle blood transfusion occurred before several hours or throughout his/her head, it is an upper part to the extent that any other person can also be recognized, and that he/she can be asked from outside the country." However, on September 15, 2019, the day immediately before the victim participated in the law lecture, and immediately after the victim appeared at around 17:37, the CCTV image taken over at the front of his/her body, and the victim was able to recognize his/her head. However, if the middle blood transfusion was at the time of this case, the participants, including the Defendants, who participated in the law school, could not be readily concluded in the CCTV, but it cannot be concluded that the CCTV was a witness of the above law school and the witness of the above law.

B) The fact that the victim was suffering from ordinary arms and tension even in the name of the victim about to go back is that not only the victim's dynamic X, AT, a witness on the part of the defendant, but also the defendants asserted. After the victim's appearance of the law lecture, the victim went to take lessons of the accident in Nan area. If the victim was to go to the middle blood transfusion on the part of the victim's right right before the above CCTV image was taken, the victim would have attempted not to be exposed to others due to the nature of the CCTV, and the head that was bound by the victim would have been able to go to go to the above part in the easy manner. The victim was bound by the victim's head on September 16, 19, the day of this case without being exposed to Nan on the part of the victim (see, e.g., No. 45 and 8182, Sept. 16, 199).

C) Examining the victim’s dong line 9 after the legal lecture of the preceding day of the instant case, as seen earlier.

In the same way, N from N, and its neighboring points, she was able to look back to N, and returned to her house after taking extracurricular lessons, and returned to N after around 17:12 on the day of the instant case, which is the following day. He was able to do so. He was able to do so in the middle line, and there was no place or case where he was frighting to another person. On the day of the instant case, there was no telephone call between N, such as Defendant C, etc. and N, and the president of a private teaching institute, and there was no record of using the card. In light of the fact that there was no record of using the card, there is no possibility that the victim was her in a place other than the above place. Defendant A had a possibility of self-injury of the victim, but if harming himself, Defendant A did not appear to have been able to do so, the head of AT or C, and the head of a private teaching institute or the president of a private teaching institute, and there was no clear statement that the victim did not have any ever.

D) The witness AE shall be free from time to time after the lapse of “time” in this Court.

서 명확하게 보이지 않는 경우가 있다. 이 사건 중선출혈이 신선(프레쉬)하다 말하는 것은 상처의 문양이 그대로 남아있는 형태가 비교적 잘 보존되어 있기 때문이고, 가장 최근의 것이라고 생각하였다. 위 중선출혈이 꼭 사망 당일 발생하였다고 단정할 수는 없으나, 모양이 그대로 유지됐기 때문에 하루 이틀 이내에는 위 중선출혈이 분명히 생겼을 거라고 생각한다'고 진술하였고, 증인 AF도 '이 사건 중선출혈이 신선해보이는 상처라고 생각한다. 당일 손상에 가깝다고 보이며 색깔이 좀 더 빨갛게 보이는 것으로 봐서 (해당 출혈이 발생한 시점으로부터) 굉장히 짧은 시간이지 않을까 싶다'고 진술하였다. 한편 증인 2은 '사건 당일 이벤트가 없었어도 피해자가 사망할 수 있는 상태였다고 판단된다'면서도, 사건 당일 피해자에 대한 폭행이 있었을 가능성이 배제되는 것은 아니며, '이 사건 중선출혈은 비교적 신선하고, 사건 당일 또는 그 전날 늦게 생겼다고 봐도 크게 어색하지 않다'는 취지로도 진술하였다. 위 진술들을 종합하면 결국, 이 사건 중선출혈은 피해자 사망 당일 발생하였을 가능성이 높다는 것인바, 이 역시 위 중 선출혈이 2018. 9. 16. 17:54경 이후에 발생하였음을 뒷받침한다.

E) Accordingly, the instant middle blood transfusion was the same as the body of the victim after the victim entered the N in the building.

It is an area newly created because of increased and long objects.

8) Circumstances that there is a considerable interval of time between Defendant A, B, and C to 119 reporting after the contact with Defendant A, B, and C, and that there is no choice but to deem that Defendant A committed an assault against the victim.

A) On September 16, 2018, the victim sent text messages from Defendant B at around 16:16, around 17:12, from around 17:12, the victim called Defendant C to approximately 20 seconds (in light of the fact that the address of the relevant sending base station is Seoul Dongdaemun-gu DD, the victim appears to have existed in his/her residence at that time) and sent the taxi to DoE around that time. At around 17:48, when the victim was moving to a taxi, the victim called from C again at around 17:5,53, and the victim did not arrive at the direction of 17:5,53, the victim did not arrive at the direction of 17:5,00,000,000, and around 17:5:53, the victim did not arrive at the direction of 17:6,000,000,0000 from the 17:5,000,000,000).

B) As seen earlier, the victim’s pocket book shall be avoided on the date near the victim’s death.

There are contents that require the victim to translate the NM thoroughly and within the time limit. From September 8, 2018, the victim stated that "the content of the revision was late ? was able to see 10:0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 :0 : 1:0 :0 :0 :0 : 1:0 :0 :0 :0 :0 : 1:0 :0 :0 :0 : 1:0 :0 :0 :0 : 2:0 :0 :0 : 1:0 :0 : 1:0 :0 : 1:0 :0 : 1:0 :0 : 2: 1:0 :0 : 1:0 : 1:0 :0 : 1:0 : 1:0 : 1; 20,000 : 3: 1: 20: 1. 1. 1. 1. :06. :06 : 1: 1. . 1. 2. . . 1. . . 1. . 1. . . . . . . . .). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .)

C) the above content, currency content, Defendant A, B, C, and the arrival time of the victim;

Considering the victim's behavior, it is inevitable to see that the victim came to arrive at N up to 18:00 after the legal work and around that time. Defendant B did not confirm whether the victim had been a victim at least 19:04 after Defendant C made a call with the victim, and Defendant B did not think that “C would have come to 7 times before the victim was discovered in the last telephone,” and “C would have come to o at 7 times” in this court, and “A was aware that the victim had come to o while going to o while on the last Saturday before that day, it was difficult to see that the victim would have come to o't come to o while on the last Saturday, and therefore, C would have come to o't come to o't come to o, and it was hard to say that the date of discussion would have come to o't come to o at all after the call.”

D) In addition to Defendant B, when the promise with the victim was 19:00.

Although the gate states that the victim was no longer contacted and that the victim was not found, it is difficult to believe in light of the above-mentioned facts and the following circumstances.

(1) In the course of being examined as the first witness for a defense incident, Defendant C shall be deemed to have suffered damage.

On September 15, 2018), the Defendant made a statement to the effect that, at around 14:00, the N Office “I have to drink,” and that, therefore, the Defendant was not scheduled to make a little speech between the Defendants and the victims on September 16, 2018 (the first statement of statement, No. 85), and Defendant D made a statement to the effect that, at around 14:0, the N Office called “I have to drink, I have to drink,” and that, at the day before the victim’s death, I called that I had not made a little promise between the Defendants and the victims.

② However, Defendant A is under investigation of the first witness due to a change of personal history.

'Around September 15, 2018, the defendant B, C, D, and C had been waiting for meals with the victim, and the defendant made a statement that she had been waiting for her farites ( September 16, 2018) from the defendant D to her farites ( September 16, 2018), that she had been waiting for her farites (the first statement No. 60), and the defendant D had already made a statement that she had already been aware of the fact that she had a promise with the victim on September 15, 2018 in the second witness investigation, but the above defendant was not aware of the fact that she had a promise. At the DG house (the residence of the defendant A), the defendant made a statement that she had already been willinged to her farites with the above defendant at the same time as the above defendant's farites (the second witness statement that she had given her her farites of the statement.

③ Since September 15, 2018, Defendant D met the victim at N around September 18, 2018:

At that time, the victim made a statement that she was boomed and the victim she was slicked about about 19:00 on the following day (the second written statement No. 409), and the defendant C also made a statement that she was slick at a meal place (the second written statement No. 409 on September 15, 2018), stating that she was slicking about the first day (the second written statement No. 422), and that she reversed the statement in accordance with the changed statement purport of the defendant A (the second written statement No. 422).

(4) The Defendants’ statements in the prosecutor’s office and this court as above are reversed.

However, there is no evidence that Defendant A, B, and C had already arrived at the place of promise after the time of promise, and there was no attempt to grasp the location of Defendant D by making contact with Defendant D, who did not appear at the place of promise after the time of promise. In light of the relationship between Defendant D and Defendant A and other Defendants, it is difficult to say that Defendant D could not have arrived at the time of promise without any contact. Furthermore, Defendant A said that, around 19:35, 19:35, the fact that the victim was discovered by telephone to Defendant D and the victim was able to observe the promise (Article 2099 of the third right right), Defendant D got N, the original place of promise, not the hospital transmitted by the victim, and that the victim did not arrive at the place of promise, and that the victim did not look at the site and did not appear to have complied with the other Party D’s behavior.

e) Thereafter, Defendant B was landed from N around 18:42 and was made of a hole of the first floor of Ma building.

포카리스웨트 캔 2개를 구매한 뒤 18:44경 N으로 올라갔다가, 18:46경 다시 N에서 내려와 위 캔 2개를 위 구멍가게에 맡겨놓고서 18:48경 인근에 있는 DH편의점에서 포카리스웨트 1.5L짜리 1병을 구매하고 뛰어 와 18:50경 다시 N으로 올라갔다(제2권 제683~684쪽, 제5권 제350~355쪽), 이는 피해자가 폭행으로 쓰러지자 피해자에게 먹이기 위하여 포카리스웨트를 사러간 것이고, 캔 음료의 용량이 작다는 등의 사유로 다시 병음료를 사러 간 것이라고 봄이 합리적이다. 이에 대해 피고인 B는 '갈증이 나서 1층으로 내려가 캔 2개를 사왔고, 피고인 C은 안 마시겠다고 하고 피고인 A에게 권하니 큰 거로 사오라고 해서(그냥 놔두고 같이 먹는 개념이어서) 바꾸러 간 것이며, 큰 음료수가 없어서 캔 2개를 맡기고 대로에 있는 편의점으로 간 것이다'는 취지로 진술하나, 피고인 B와 피고인 A만 마실 것인데 놔두고 먹기 위하여 큰 것으로 바꿀 필요가 있는지 의문이고, 그것도 처음 샀던 가게에 없어서 맡겨두고 다른 곳에 가서 사왔다는 것이어서 도저히 믿기 어렵다.

바) 피고인 B는 19:09경 '사람이 쓰러졌다, 의식이 없다, 구토를 하고 있다'는 취지로 119에 신고하였고, 이윽고 19:12경 피고인 A이 피해자를 업고 내려가는 장면과 피고인 B, C이 이를 따라가는 장면이 위 M빌딩 3층 CCTV에 촬영되었다. 위 신고를 받고 출동한 119구급대가 19:15경 현장에 도착하여 19:16경 피해자를 접촉하였는데, 당시 피해자는 호흡정지 및 심정지 상태였으며 동공반응도 없는 상태였다(제1권 제115쪽, 제487쪽, 제2권 제687~688쪽), 피해자는 19:27경 구급차에 실려 Q병원으로 후송되었으나, 20:40경 위 병원에서 사망 판정을 받았다.

G) As above, from the time when the victim entered the N building, Defendant B filed a report with Defendant B 119

한 같은 날 19:09경까지 사이에는 약 1시간 15분의 시간적 간격이 존재한다. 피고인들은 이 법정에서 일치하여, 피해자가 사망 당일 N 내에 들어온 적이 없다면서, 2018. 9. 16. 19:00경 피해자와 저녁약속을 잡은 상태에서 피고인 A, B, C이 피해자 등을 기다리던 중, 같은 날 19:04경 '쿵'하는 소리를 듣고 N 밖으로 나갔으며, 이때 M빌딩 3층과 4층 사이 화장실 앞 복도에 쓰러져 있는 피해자를 발견하였다는 취지로 진술한다. 그러나 앞서 본 사정들에 아래에서 보는 수사기관에서의 피고인들 진술의 상호 불일치 및 비일관성, 비합리성에 비추어 이와 같은 피고인들의 진술은 전혀 신빙할 수가 없다.

(1) Regarding the circumstance of finding the first victim

Defendant B is subject to investigation by the first witness due to a change of personal history.

무실에 있던 중에 밖에서 "쿵'하는 소리가 나서 밖으로 나가보니 3~4층 사이 화장실 밖 앞에 피해자가 쓰러져 있었다'고 진술하여(제1회 진술조서 제21쪽), 자신이 먼저 '쿵' 소리를 듣고 밖으로 나간 것처럼 진술하였다. 반면 피고인 C은 최초 변사사건 조사에서 '사무실에서 책 정리를 하고 있는데 계단 쪽에서 무언가 소리가 들려서 출입문을 열고 나가 보았더니 피해자가 복도에 천정을 보고 벽에 기대에 무슨 말인지를 모르겠으나 흥얼거리며 있는 소리를 듣고 "원장님"하고 소리를 지른 후에 중간층으로 내려가는데 원장님(피고인 B)과 A 선생님이 같이 내려갔다'고 진술하였고(제1회 진술조서 제32쪽), 경찰 제1회 피의자신문에서도 '본인이 먼저 "쿵'하는 소리를 듣고 문을 열고 나가 피해자를 발견했고, 그 뒤에 피고인 B 등이 뒤따라 나왔다'는 취지로 진술하였다(제56쪽). 피고인 B는 제2회 참고인 조사에서 '피고인 C이 운동을 하다 말고 출입문 방향으로 가더니 갑자기 "원장님 하고 소리쳐서 본인도 출입문으로 나가 보니 피해자가 쓰러져 있었다'면서 피고인 C의 진술에 일부 부합하는 방향으로 진술을 번복하였다. (제2회 진술조서 제390쪽).

(2) Regarding measures after the discovery of the victim

Defendants shall be deemed to have suffered damage in the course of being investigated by the first witness due to a change of personal history.

자가 M빌딩 3층과 4층 사이 복도에 쓰러져 있는 것을 발견하고서 응급조치를 취하다가 피고인 A이 피해자를 업고 1층으로 내려갔다'고만 진술하였다가, 제2회 참고인 조사에서 굳이 '피해자를 위 빌딩 4층 N 앞 복도까지 데리고 올라갔다'는 진술을 추가하였고, 이후로도 위와 같은 취지로 진술하면서 피해자를 N 안에 데리고 들어간 사실이 없다고 진술하였다. 그러나 피해자가 후송된 병원인 Q병원의 의무기록(순번 342) 상에는 "원장 B 씨 진술에 의하면, (중략) 4층 N 올라오는 계단에서 쓰러져 N으로 데리고 들어와 침을 놓고 주무르다가 숨을 안 쉬는 것 같아 119 신고하였다고 함. 1층으로 옮겼고, 그때 119 구급대원이 도착(후략)" 하였다고 기재되어 있고, 이 사건의 변사발생보고(제5권 제3~4쪽)에는 "갑자기 계단 쪽에서 쿵 하는 소리가 들려 밖으로 나가보니 여자가 쓰러져 있어 N 내로 옮겨 응급조치를 하였다는 피고인 B의 진술이 기재되어 있다.

(3) Regarding the time when Defendant D arrives at the site

The report on the occurrence of a change in the instant case (No. 5 No. 4) is about “N according to D’s statements.”

However, there is a statement that "the request for assistance from N" was made on the second floor stairs, and it was written as if the victim was a witness at the site of the defendant D. In the process of the first investigation into a change of witness, the defendant D left N in order to drink as the Director B, etc., and the victim was living together on the side of the first floor, and the Director B (the defendant B) took charge of the victim's arms and legs, and made a false statement that "the defendant was making a false statement during the first investigation into the suspect's interrogation protocol (the first statement No. 42). However, the defendant A, while waiting for the defendant B, C, D, and C and the victim, and the victim's meals, during the second investigation into the suspect interrogation protocol (the first statement right of the defendant No. 60) and the defendant D did not appear to have arrived at the police hospital of this case, and the defendant D was found to have arrived at the police hospital of this case, and the defendant No. 9 was found to have arrived at the police hospital of this case No. 9.

(4) Other

Defendant B, the N Director, and Defendant D, the N Director, are N Trainees

상당 기간 활동을 함께 해온 피해자를 모를 수가 없음에도 불구하고, 이 사건의 변사 발생보고(제5권 제3~4쪽)에는 "N 원장 B 상황설명을 청취한 바 (중략) 갑자기 계단 쪽에서 쿵 하는 소리가 들려 밖으로 나가보니 여자가 쓰러져 있어 (중략) 119에 신고하였다고 진술하였고, 변사자의 인적사항에 대해 정확하게 알지 못한다고 진술하였다", "D의 진술에 의하면 (중략) (변사자의) 인적사항에 대해서는 알지 못한다고 진술하였다"고 기재되어 있다.

H) The Defendants did not enter into N after the victim entered the N, and cremation.

I argue that it is possible to use it in the process of coming out of the room for a long time.

However, at around 17:53 on the same day, the victim who was within N direction before and after the receipt of the Defendant C’s phone at around 17:54 on the same day, and at around 17:54 on the same day, it is difficult for the victim to have been in a corridor or toilet with the 3rd floor of and the 4th floor of the MM building for more than one hour. Furthermore, the victim died from the 'tension climatic forces or external shock,' and the victim died from the above symptoms (the defendant asserts that the victim might have suffered snow in the process), and there is no possibility that the victim might take out the toilet again from the toilet. From around 18:42 to 18:50 on the same day, the victim could not reasonably have made a statement from the 15th floor to the 15th floor of the MM building at around 3:50 on the same day, and the victim could not have been in the above 17th floor at the prosecution (the above 197th floor).

I) A person who was in the foregoing city border N is Defendant A, B, and C. As seen earlier.

In a situation where Defendant A caused the victim to complete the reverse work, it is obvious that Defendant A’s quality was attributable if the victim failed to do so properly. Moreover, in light of the status within Defendant A’s N and N president, instructors, and trainees, including the other Defendants and the victim, and the attitude of Defendant A to substitute for Defendant A, it seems that the victim could not be up to the victim because B and C were in the presence of Defendant A. There are many circumstances that Defendant A continuously assaulted students, including the victim, while it is difficult to find out the circumstance that Defendant B and C assaulted ar.

(j) Before entering N, as seen earlier, the instant case

In full view of all the circumstances without election blood, it is reasonable to view that the victim died of assault by the Defendant A by the autopsy, etc. between September 16, 2018 and 19:04.

9) Inducing the Defendants following the death of the victim (the additional indirect situation that supports the Defendant A’s suspicion of special assault)

A) Defendant A’s behavior immediately after the victim was transmitted.

As seen earlier, the victim was on September 16, 2018 (hereafter in this paragraph, the date omitted)

19:27경 구급차에 실려 병원으로 후송된 직후, 피고인 A은 19:35경 피고인 D에게 전화하였다. 이윽고 피고인 D은 19:54경 M빌딩에 도착하여 위 빌딩 2~3층 사이 화장실 앞 등을 살피는 행동을 하다가 N이 있는 위 빌딩 4층 방향으로 올라갔고, 경찰에서 자신이 사건 현장에 있었던 것처럼 거짓으로 진술하였다.

B) Replacement of the Defendants’ mobile phones

(1) Defendant D, at around 12:35 September 2, 2018, operated by AA, Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government DIB loan

딩 4층 소재 아이폰 수리점을 방문하여 AA에게 중국어 버전인 아이폰X 휴대전화를 건네주면서 초기화를 요청하였고, 이후 피고인 D은 같은 날 13:42경 피고인 A, C과 함께 재차 위 아이폰 수리점을 방문하여 초기화된 위 아이폰X 휴대전화를 건네받았으며, 이윽고 피고인들은 같은 날 14:33경 AC이 운영하는 위 DI빌딩 1층 소재 중고폰 판매점을 방문하여 중고 휴대전화 2대(갤럭시 와이드, 갤럭시 J5)를 구매하였다. 이때 위 휴대전화 2대의 구입비용 14만 원은 피고인 D이 계좌이체 방식으로 지급하였다.

(2) Defendant D, together with a man of the 20th beginning of the week following the day from Defendant D

On September 26, 2018, Defendant A visited the phone repair point to transfer information, such as the phone number, photograph, etc. of the former mobile phone used by Defendant A to AA, and sent AA a letter “I may seek for the lowest and highest amount of No.4” to A around October 2, 2018, and then purchased the middle and high galthogle 4 cellular phone at around October 2, 2018 (the witness A and AC’s respective legal statements and No. 65-70).

C) Details of the information stored in the mobile phone after replacement

(1) The above Aphone X mobile phone is Defendant A and the above Dogal Dogular phone.

Defendant B, the J5 mobile phone in the above gallon city was used by Defendant C, and the above gallon 4 mobile phone was used by Defendant D, respectively. AO team was employed in N and conducted search and seizure on October 3, 2018. At this time, the Defendants submitted the above 4 mobile phone instead of the previous use to AO team. At the police, the aforementioned 4 mobile phone was submitted to the AO team. At the police, the digital siren was conducted on the opon X, gallon road, and J5 mobile phone in the gallon road, but no message was confirmed prior to September 22, 2018.

(2) On the other hand, in the case of the above gallon No. 4 mobile phones, digital sirens from the police.

행한 결과 2018. 9. 22. 이전의 정보들도 확인되었고, 그중에는 ① 피고인 D이 2017. 3. 30.경부터 그 다음날까지 피해자와 사이에 소위 '스승님 말씀내용' 정리 등과 관련하여 메시지를 주고받거나 2017. 4. 28.경 피해자에게 'BD 법문 경청 숙지사항 공지'라는 제목으로 메시지를 전송한 내역, ② 위 피고인이 2018. 9. 7. 15:12경 및 같은 달 14일 17:29경 피해자로부터 "네 내일 뵙겠습니다"라는 메시지를 전송받은 내역 등이 삭제되지 않은 채로 남아 있다. 그러나 N 수련생들이 매일의 수련상황 등을 공유하는 AI 단체채팅방에 피해자도 2018. 7. 31.경부터 2018. 9. 6.경까지 지속적으로 AI 메시지를 전송한 내역은 위 갤럭시 노트4 휴대전화에서 삭제되었다가 디지털포렌식으로 복구되었고, 피해자로부터 위 ②와 같은 메시지를 전송하기 전에 피고인 D이 피해자에게 어떠한 내용으로 메시지를 전송하였는지를 확인할 만한 정보는 디지털포렌식으로도 복구되지 아니하였다.

(3) To the present extent, the whereabouts of the mobile phones used by the Defendants have been confirmed.

(2) the Corporation.

D) After the replacement of a mobile phone, the Defendants’ behavior, attitude of statement, etc.

(1) Defendant A’s result of autopsy and cremation around September 28, 2018, and Defendant B

From September 25, 2018 to the next day, ‘the autopsy error', ‘the type of the death', ‘the recovery period of the chest, ‘the need for the autopsy', ‘the protocol of reference, ‘the admissibility of evidence', ‘the interrogation record', ‘the time required for the restoration of smartphone data, ‘the time required for the correction of smartphone data', ‘the time required for the identification of the smartphone password number', ‘the time required for the identification of the smartphone password number', ‘the restoration of the Handphone data', ‘the date for the restoration of the Handphone data', ‘the defendant C from September 23, 2018 to September 29, 2018, ‘the time required for the restoration of the Handphone file', ‘the time required for the removal of the Handphone, ‘the permanent deletion of the Handphone,' ‘the 'the 'the outer c c c c troke police station', respectively.

(2) Furthermore, between Defendant B and D from September 24, 2018 to October 2018

에 아래와 같은 내용을 비롯하여 향후 수사기관으로부터 조사를 받을 경우의 예상질문과 답변내용을 정리하는 내용의 메시지를 주고받았다. 아울러 피고인 B는 2018. 9. 30.부터 2018. 10. 1.경까지 N 수련생인 AT과도 메시지를 주고받으면서 한영번역과 관련한 예상질문과 답변을 정리하였고 그 과정에서 2018. 10. 1. 13:54~14:25경 AT에게 "D 님~ D님께서도 짬짬히 복습하셔요~", "AT아 잘못 보냈다 그 윗 내용에 답 바라고 문자들 본 후 삭제 바랄게"라고 연달아 메시지를 전송하였다(증거순번 72 참조).

A person shall be appointed.

3. Determination as to the suspicion of concealment of evidence by Defendant B, C, and D due to concealment of mobile phones

A. The above defendants' assertion

In the fourth cell phone of the judgment, since there is no evidence or information that could be evidence in relation to the victim and his death, the above cell phone cannot be considered as evidence constituting the crime of concealment of evidence. Furthermore, since the above cell phone is not operated properly, the above cell phone was replaced with a new cell phone due to the problem such as the failure of the above cell phone, etc., the above cell phone was replaced with a new cell phone, and there was no fact that Defendant D only concealed the above cell phone intentionally by the concealment of evidence, and there was no fact that Defendant B, C, etc. conspired with Defendant D to conceal the above cell phone.

(b) relevant legal principles;

In the crime of concealing evidence, another person’s criminal case or disciplinary case includes any one that may be a criminal or disciplinary case in the future even before an investigation or disciplinary procedure is commenced at the time of concealment of evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Do134, Mar. 28, 1995). In addition, “Evidence” referred to in Article 155(1) of the Criminal Act means any material that an investigation agency, a court or a disciplinary agency deems to be related to confirming the existence of the State’s penal authority or disciplinary authority in relation to another person’s criminal case or disciplinary case, and it does not seem to be disadvantageous to others, regardless of whether or not there is any value of evidence or not (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do3600, Jun. 28, 2007).

C. Determination

In full view of the contents of the above 3-B and the following circumstances revealed based on the above 3-B, it is reasonable to view that the mobile phones of the Defendants previously held constituted " evidence concerning the criminal case of Defendant A" concerning the victim's death, Defendant D intentionally concealed the aforementioned mobile phones, and Defendant B and C participated in such solicitation and participation.

1) As seen earlier, at the time of Defendant A’s assaulting the victim at N on September 16, 2018, Defendant B and C were in N, and Defendant D was not in N at the time but in contact with Defendant A immediately after the victim was on emergency medical services. Defendant D made a false statement as if the victim had not been N at the time of the above special assault incident. This is bound to be due to the fact that the victim’s death could have commenced an investigation into Defendant A with regard to the victim’s death. In addition, Defendant A made a statement at the prosecutor around May 5, 2018 to the effect that Defendant B, C, and D directly observed the above situation. In addition, Defendant D’s personal experience, including Defendant B and D, had been sufficiently informed of the victim’s death during a long-term period of time, following the victim’s death from the victim’s direct contact with Defendant D and the victim’s major person related to the investigation. In full view of the circumstances, Defendant D and the victim’s victim’s personal contact with the victim.

2) The Defendants were given and received a large number of telephone conversations and message with the victim, and, in particular, Defendant B sent the message to the female on the date of the victim’s death, Defendant C is the last person who exchanged and sent the message with the victim immediately before the victim’s death. In light of the victim and the Defendants’ status and relationship with N, etc., it is reasonable to deem the following materials: (a) the relevant telephone content and message content as meaningful to reveal the victim’s behaviors and activities; (b) the victim’s circumstances and circumstances leading up to the victim’s death and the Ma building where N is located on the date of the victim’s death; and (c) the materials related to whether the State’s penal authority against the Defendant, etc. exists in relation to the said death. Thus, the said telephone content and message content were stored; and (d) the cell phone of the Defendants already used by the Defendants constituted “Evidence in the crime of concealing evidence” as evidence.

3) In the prosecutorial investigation, Defendant D made a statement to the effect that he was replaced by the other Defendants’ mobile phones because he had been used from before before the Defendants had not operated well, and that he was collected from the other Defendants and N to obtain economic assistance by selling the existing mobile phones, and the Defendants got out of the previous mobile phones, but failed to properly state the approximate point and place of loss of the existing mobile phones. Of the newly purchased mobile phones, Defendant B, C used the new mobile phones, Defendant B, and C made a statement to the effect that the purchase cost of J 5 was borne by Defendant D was paid in cash, and that the said purchase cost was not paid in cash by the account transfer, not by simple cash delivery, and that Defendant D’s right to reply to Defendant D 1 was also known as Defendant D’s purchase cost, and Defendant D’s statement to the effect that Defendant D had not been paid in advance at the time of Defendant B and C’s new purchase cost.

4) If Defendant D’s statement was in need of economic assistance to the extent that it should be sold in another place (the economic situation of Defendant D appears to have not been good) as stated above, Defendant D’s sales of the former mobile phone at the time of new purchase of the mobile phone around September 22, 2018, and there is only no benefit from the fact that the other Defendants borne by Defendant D at the time of the new purchase of the mobile phone (the fact that Defendant D did not provide an explanation to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to purchase the mobile phone at the time of the new purchase of the mobile phone, and the previous mobile phone at the time of the new purchase of the mobile phone immediately sold it at the 4th floor of DI building at around October 2018, it is not understood that the former mobile phone sales store was not sold.

5) Rather, one of the Defendants is to make a cell phone immediately following the second witness examination.

In this case, the message was removed, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) all the Defendants were accompanied by the Defendants; (b) Defendant A, B, and C’s new mobile phones did not remain on September 22, 2018; and (c) Defendant D did not delete the message given and received until April 2017 on the gallon 4 mobile phones that Defendant D newly purchased; (b) on the other hand, the message was deleted; (c) there was an omission of the content of the AI message, which shows that the victim was actively engaged in N around July 7, 2018 to September 9, 2018; and (d) it appears that the message was deleted prior to receiving the victim’s answer character of response from the victim on September 7, 2018 and September 14, 2018.

4. Conclusion

All of the Defendants’ arguments are rejected.

Reasons for sentencing

[Defendant A]

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for three years to thirty-five years; and

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Class I crime (Death or injury caused by special violence);

[Determination of Punishment] In the event of the occurrence of death of a violent crime [Type 3]

[Special Aggravation] Aggravated Punishment: Where a person commits a crime showing the threat of group or majority power or carrying dangerous objects, the method of cruel punishment;

[Recommendation Area and Scope of Recommendations] Special Priority Area, 3 years to 7 years of imprisonment

(b) Second crimes;

[Determination of Punishment] 03. Violence Crimes [Type 6] Cumulative Assaults, Special Violence

【Special Convicted Person】

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendations] Basic Field, Imprisonment from April to October 1

(c) Scope of recommendations according to the standards for handling multiple crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for three to eight years (the upper limit of the first crime + the upper limit of the second crime);

3. Determination of sentence: Seven years of imprisonment; and

Defendant A, as N’s creativeist, demanded the victim, who is N’s trainee, to obey absolute orders. Defendant A, on the ground that the victim was aware that the victim was able to take Handphones, applied without discrimination to the body of the victim by the autopsy. Furthermore, on the ground that the Defendant, who is a son, did not take a translation of N’s laws and regulations, the Defendant, who was a son, sought a victim from the victim to the extent that he was exposed to a wide range of transfusions to the victim’s arms by using a knife autopsy, etc., which is a dangerous object, and eventually led to the death of the victim. The physical and mental condition of the victim immediately before the death indicated in the victim’s pocket book and autopsy results, etc. is extremely harsh in light of the motive and background of the crime, the means, method, consequence, and consequence of the crime, and the relationship between A and the victim. The Defendant is extremely heavy in light of the aforementioned criminal intent to merely deny the Defendant’s criminal act, but did not reflect his intention at the beginning of the investigation.

The circumstances favorable to ○: Defendant A appears to have committed each of the crimes of this case on the premise that the victim who is a N trainee will receive a decoration. There is no particular criminal punishment against the above Defendant, except for a long period of suspension of execution and one time prior to the suspension of execution.

○ In addition, considering all sentencing factors shown in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the age, character and conduct, family environment, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment as ordered shall be determined within the scope of the recommended sentence.

[Defendant B, C, and D]

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to five years; and

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] Destruction of Evidence and Destruction of Evidence / [No. 1] Destruction of Evidence and Concealment of Witness

[Special Emotionals] Mitigations: Where there are grounds for special consideration in the commission of a crime or the motive of a crime.

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendations] Reduction Area, Imprisonment from one month to ten months

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months and suspension of execution for 2 years; and

The above defendants committed a crime of concealing important evidence to clarify the reason for the death of the victim, who is the N's trainee who is the president or instructor, and even after committing the crime, the above defendants continued to have a non-cooperative attitude in the investigation by gathering in advance the contents of the statement at the investigative agency.

In light of the Defendants’ N status and reputation relationship, the instant crime of harboring evidence appears to be either by the direction of Defendant A, which is absolutely located within N or by the absolute obeyion relationship formed by Defendant A at least within the N, and there is a reason to take into account the details and motive of the crime. Information stored in Defendant D’s cell phone was not completely deleted due to the her mother’s circumstance, and was restored to a considerable part. The aforementioned Defendants are both initial offenders.

○ In addition, considering all sentencing factors as shown in the arguments in the instant case, such as the age, character and conduct, family environment, motive, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment as ordered shall be determined within the scope of the recommended sentence.

Part of Innocence (Defendant B, C, D)

1. Facts charged;

In preparation for the occurrence of the occurrence of the occurrence of the death of the victim by the victim at the time of the victim, the Defendants were able to conceal evidence related to the death of the victim with A. Accordingly, from September 16, 2018 to September 16, 19:09, the Defendants and A requested the victim to provide first aid services to the victim, up to 20:54 on the same day, the police officers of Sejong Police Station found N's "N for the purpose of investigation" from "N" to "from September 16, 2018, from September 16, 2018, and from September 200 to 20:54, the Defendants kept in the ordinary seal and concealed three marries (the instant mar inspection) used by A when they assault the victim as above. Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to conceal evidence about the death of the victim.

2. Determination

In light of the above facts and circumstances as seen in the part of the “determination on the Defendant’s and the defense counsel’s argument” and, in particular, the facts and circumstances, such as 3.B., there is a lack of evidence to acknowledge that the instant wood examination was an act of hiding the instant wood examination during the time from 19:09 to 20:47 on September 16, 2018 on the sole basis of the facts and circumstances as seen earlier, in light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

A. As a result of the appraisal of the instant wooden inspection, no evidence exists that the victim’s gene type, scams, etc. was found, and otherwise, that the said wooden inspection was used as an assault tool against the victim. In light of the fact that the date of occurrence of the instant wooden inspection was September 16, 2018, and that the time when the first search and seizure was conducted on October 3, 2018, the said wooden inspection used in the assault was sufficient time to keep the scam in other places, and thus, it cannot be said that the instant wooden inspection was directly used on the said date.

B. After Defendant B filed a report at around 19:09, at around 119:12, Defendant B went to the 1st floor of MM building, Defendant B, and C immediately went to the 19:17-19:20, and Defendant B did not go to the 3-minute N at around 19:20, and Defendant B did not go to the n until the victim was transferred to Q Hospital at around 19:27. Thus, the person who could have concealed the instant wood inspection from around 19:09 to around 19:27 was only Defendant B who went to the N at around 19:17-19:20, and the situation or time was at the time when the instant wood inspection was concealed, and Defendant D did not have any concealed evidence at the time, and Defendant D could not have concealed the aforementioned evidence.

C. Defendant A returned from around 19:31, around 19:54, and around 20:07, Defendant C returned to N in the order of around 20:40. Defendant B appears to have continued to stay in the above hospital until around 20:40 after Q hospital was made the final judgment of death of the victim depending on the vehicle sent after the victim. In other words, Defendant A was only Defendant A from around 19:31 to around 19:54, and there was no Defendant B, C, and D. The fact that Defendant A calls each to Defendant C and D immediately after the victim sent. However, there was no evidence as to whether Defendant A was aware of the promise to Defendant D by telephone around 19:35. Moreover, Defendant B could not be ruled out from around 20:29 that Defendant C’s phone was not 1 or 19:5, even if there was no possibility that the instant phone was able to have been able to keep the phone or 1:5.

D. A witness DC stated to the effect that, around September 15, 2018, after the completion of the Defendant A’s legal lecture, Defendant A gave an opportunity for high-ranking trainees, such as AX, to move to a multi-use room. It is difficult to find objective evidence clearly contradictory to the witness’s testimony. Although it is difficult to understand the witness’s testimony, the witness DC was kept in a multi-use room at N around the time of the instant case, and it is difficult to completely exclude the possibility of continuous multi-use inspection from around September 15, 2018.

3. Conclusion

This part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime, and thus, a verdict of innocence is rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly announced pursuant to the main sentence of

Judges fixed line

Judges Kim Jong-tae

Judges Bo Dong-dong

1) To the extent that there is no concern about actual disadvantage to the defense of the above defendant, part of the facts charged shall be appropriately revised in accordance with the relationship of evidence, etc.

2) The contents are as shown in Appendix 1.

3) The details thereof are as shown in Appendix 2.

4) The contents are as shown in Appendix 3.

5) Contents are as listed in Appendix 4.

6) The specific contents of the defendant A and his defense counsel's specific arguments and the contents of their judgments are as shown in the attached Table 5.

7) Contents are as listed in Appendix 7.

8) In particular, from September 8, 2018 to September 16, 2018, the victim's records are as shown in attached Table 8.

9) Specific time and activities are as shown in Appendix 8.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.