Evidence of the statement of the defendant prepared by the prosecutor after prosecution

The admissibility of the statement of the defendant prepared by the public prosecutor shall not be denied just because the statement was prepared after the public prosecution is instituted.

Article 312 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 82Do754 Delivered on June 8, 1982

Defendant 1 and two others

Defendants

Attorneys Im Jong-soo et al. and one other

Busan District Court Decision 84No596 delivered on June 23, 1984

All appeals are dismissed.

The number of detention days after the appeal shall be calculated by 50 days in each original sentence.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to Defendant 1’s ground of appeal

According to the evidence adopted by the court below, it is sufficient to recognize the criminal facts of the defendant, and it cannot be said that there is an error of misconception of facts against the rules of evidence such as the theory of lawsuit. In addition, with respect to the judgment sentenced to imprisonment of eight years as above in this case, it cannot be viewed as the grounds for appeal on the grounds

In the end, all arguments are groundless.

2. As to Defendant 2’s grounds of appeal

According to the evidence adopted by the court below, there is no error of law by finding facts against the defendant, without any evidence, or by misunderstanding facts against the rules of evidence. The theory of lawsuit is nothing more than misunderstanding the evidence preparation and fact-finding belonging to the exclusive jurisdiction of the court below, and it is not acceptable. In addition, it cannot be said that the prosecutor's statement as to the defendant 1 prepared after the prosecution is inadmissible just because it was made after the prosecution. Thus, it cannot be said that the court below adopted it as evidence and it violated the principle of court-oriented trial or the principle of open trial.

All arguments are groundless.

3. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant 3 (the grounds of appeal by defense counsel are examined to the extent of supplement in the above grounds of appeal, since the grounds of appeal by defense counsel were submitted after the submission period expired)

According to the evidence adopted by the court below, the facts charged against the defendant can be acknowledged, and there is no error of misconception of facts against the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, nor there is no error of mistake of facts against the rules of evidence, nor there is no legitimate ground for appeal against the judgment sentenced to the four-year imprisonment as in this case.

4. All appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices O Sung-sung(Presiding Justice)