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

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Inasmuch as the facts established in a criminal judgment that became final and conclusive on the same factual basis are material evidence, it is difficult to accept the determination of facts in the relevant criminal trial.

Unless there are special circumstances acknowledged, facts contrary thereto cannot be acknowledged (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do10096, Jun. 25, 2009). Furthermore, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial. The conviction should be based on evidence with probative value that leads to a judge to believe that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt (see Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). If there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it is inevitable to determine the defendant's benefit (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do735, Apr. 27, 2006). In addition, when determining the credibility of confession, the determination of the credibility of confession should be based on objective rationality, the motive or reason for confession, any circumstance leading to confession, any circumstances other than the confession, and any circumstances favorable to the defendant's confession or the aforementioned facts charged should be determined based on the premise that the confession of the court below was submitted, and all of the aforementioned facts charged are inconsistent with E131.

3. However, it is difficult to accept the above determination by the lower court for the following reasons.

(1) The facts charged are as follows.