All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the grounds that there is no evidence to reinforce the confession of the Defendant on October 9, 2015, 2015, i.e., the person on October 12, 2015, i.e., theft on October 13, 2015, and i.e., each of the larceny on October 18, 2015. However, among the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the on-site photographs of the Defendant directly indicating the place where the Defendant committed the crime are located are corroborative evidence distinct from the confession of the Defendant.

In addition, each of the above facts charged is a criminal newly led to a confession of the defendant in the process of undergoing an investigation of each of the crimes found guilty at the court below. Since each of the above facts charged was not registered with an investigative agency as a non-indicted case, the circumstances that the investigative agency did not have any reason to force or reply to the confession of the defendant in order to change the non-indicted case that cannot be identified as the defendant into the crime are also evidence to reinforce the confession

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment 1 on the Prosecutor’s argument of misunderstanding the legal principles as to the confessions ought to have an independent value of evidence, which is substantially independent from the confessions of the Defendant. As such, the confessions of the Defendant are not independent evidence for confessions, and thus, it cannot be proven as evidence for reinforcement.

① Therefore, confessions other than the courtroom of the defendant, ② Documents stating the confession of the defendant (a written statement of suspect interrogation and written statement), ③ the confession of the defendant, ④ the statement made by the defendant, ④ the penbook in which the defendant was prepared, ⑤ the re-performance, etc. at the scene of the crime of the defendant, which is the confession by performance, cannot be evidence to reinforce the confession.

2) In light of the above legal principles, each photograph attached to the health report and investigation report (as to the attachment, etc. of a photograph of a crime which the accused stated) is merely a face-to-face where the defendant sets the scene of the crime led to his/her confession.