Whether there is a person under oath who is 10 years old or older to testify;

The fifth-year student of a national school who was under the age of 10 at the time of the accident is deemed to have the ability to make a judgement in view of the circumstances before and after the testimony or statement even if he is under the person under oath.

Article 146 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Hah Jin-kin

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 83No6494 delivered on February 7, 1984

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Criminal Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The judgment of the court of first instance, from April 30, 1982 to March 30, 1982, the defendant was in office as a school teacher for the third-year school of the same Duncheon Commercial High School, and around 14:30 on May 8, 1983, the defendant recognized that 7, Jung-gu, Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, 14:7, from the part of the Korean Olympic Committee, was in office as a school teacher for the third-year school of the third-year school and that 150 students of the above school were requested from the Korean Olympic Committee to provide 83 livestock-gu Gabscirging events so that they can enjoy winding, and that the above 150 students of the above school were infused with 0-8 to 30 water supply, and that the above 150 students of the above school was influort with the right string line under the name of the defendant, despite that there is a danger of explosion influt weather.

2. In accordance with the record, the above facts of the recognition are examined as follows: “The testimony of the witness of the first instance court and the statements made to the investigation agency of the witness of the trial, which are evidence consistent with the fact that female students, who are influent to the right side of the defendant, had a different lacing with the wind line cited by female students.”

1. Although the forest land is a five-year student of a national school who has reached the age of 10 as of February 11, 1973 at the time of the accident, it is recognized that it has the ability to make a decision in view of the circumstances before and after the statement in the place of testimony. Therefore, even though it is a person under oath, it is difficult to adopt a theory that there is no ability to testify even if he is a person under oath.

ㄴ. 기록에 의하여 동 증언 및 진술내용을 검토하건대, 동인은 당시 자기앞 약 1미터 정도에 서있던 피고인이 바지주머니에서 라이타를 꺼내 불을 켜더니 그 왼쪽 여학생 옆구리 부분에 들고 있는 풍선에 갔다 댔다가 끄고 오른쪽으로 약1미터 이동하여 오른쪽 여학생이 왼쪽옆구리 부분에 들고 있는 풍선밑에 라이타를 다시켰고 그 순간에 그 풍선이 터지면서 나머지 풍선도 계속 터졌다고 하고 여학생은 모두 한손에 10개 내지 15개의 풍선을 들고 있었는데 처음 왼쪽에 서있던 여학생은 오른손에 오른쪽에 서있던 여학생은 왼손에 들고 있었으며 여러개의 풍선중 밑에 깔린것이 옆구리 부분에 있었다는 것이다.

However, we find it difficult to accept our common sense that it is difficult to accept the fact that the first place with the wind line on the left side has the right wind line, and that it is a large-scale explosion, and that it is a face-to-face with the wind line outside the public, and that it is common person. However, it can be seen that the defendant, who completed military service on the ground of the Navy, was flusium in a female school training school and the defendant was flusium in the wind line that the student was flusium in the direction of the student as a female school training teacher, without any other purpose. On the records, it is difficult to find out the circumstances that the defendant was flusium, or that there was a flusson's other purpose.

ㄷ. 그리고 당시 피고인의 인솔아래 사고장소의 피고인이 있던 자리 부근에서 풍선을 들고 있었던 제1심의용의 증인 정순영, 송지연, 조복남 및 윤강병의 증언들을 종합하면 들고 있던 풍선은 머리위 1미터 정도로 떠 있었고 포항제철프랑카드가 있는 쪽에서 펑하는 소리와 함께 불꽃이 솟아오르고 이어 약20초 후에 그들이 가지고 있는 풍선들이 연쇄폭발하였다 말하고 있는 점과 피고인의 화상이 다른 여학생에 비하여 퍽 경미한 것을 기록상 알 수 있다.

Considering this point, the testimony or statement of the forest land in question is considered to be inappropriate in our rule of experience to view that it is difficult to believe it easily.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is erroneous in determining the facts in violation of the rules of evidence, and therefore, the judgment of the court below which supported the judgment of the court of first instance shall also be deemed to have committed the same illegality as the judgment of the court of first instance.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed and remanded, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all Justices involved.

Justices Jeon Soo-hee (Presiding Justice)