The case where the collegiate panel of the principal district court of the appellate court, which is the appellate court, has judged as the first instance court on a case in which a case has been tried by a single judge of a district court in the first instance, due to changes in indictments in the appellate court.

The appellate court in a case prosecuted for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and tried by a single judge of the district court at the first instance, may judge the case as the first instance court, since the prosecutor changed the facts charged and the applicable provisions of Acts to the death or injury, and the appellate court permitted it and the collegiate panel of the district court and its branch court at the second instance, and the appellate court, in a case to be tried at the second instance, has no right of right of right of right of right of right of right as the second instance with regard to such case. However, since the appellate court has a right

Articles 367 and 298 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Article 28 of the Court Organization Act, Article 32 of the same Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul District Court Decision 89 High Court Decision 3726 Decided North Korea's Branch of the First Instance (Law Firm 89 High Court Decision)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

One hundred and sixty-five days out of the detention days prior to the rendering of a judgment shall be included in the above sentence.

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is that the sentence of the court below is unreasonable because of the defendant's motive, method, and circumstances after the crime. Before the judgment on the argument on the appeal as to the above appeal, the prosecutor ex officio examined the facts charged and applicable provisions of the law on the second trial date, and acknowledged the facts that the party members permitted the change of the facts charged and the applicable provisions on the second trial date, so the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any longer.

Therefore, a party member is reversed the judgment of the court below under Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the case subject to amendment of indictment constitutes imprisonment with prison labor for not less than three years under Article 259 (1) of the Criminal Act, and thus, Article 32 (1) 3 of the Court Organization Act and the collegiate panel of the district court and its branch court under Article 28 (2) 2 of the Court Organization Act have no right to object jurisdiction as the second instance court. On the other hand, since it is recognized that the party member has a right to object jurisdiction as the first instance court of this case, a party member is to judge the first instance court of this case under the proviso of Article 367 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

On November 1, 1989, at around 02:30, the Defendant: (a) 2:30, the victim Nonindicted Party 1 (Namnam, 39 years of age) was satisfing in the new Seoul Fransh club located adjacent to the new Seoul Fransh-gu, Seoul and 136-18-18-2 hours in advance; (b) satisfing the cost for self-tending; (c) satisfing the victim’s head; (d) satisfing the victim’s head; (d) satisfing the victim’s head on the wall side of the road; and (e) satfing the victim’s body head on several occasions with his satflaf cuts outside the floor; and (e) 15:4,5,67,78, 368, 568, 57, and 158, etc. of the same Section’s body death; (e) 17: death of the same month.

The remainder of the facts in the judgment, except that of a private person,

1. Statement corresponding thereto in this court by the defendant;

1. Statement corresponding to the interrogation protocol of the accused prepared by the public prosecutor;

1. Each statement made by the judicial police officer with respect to Nonindicted 2 and Nonindicted 3 in the course of handling their affairs

1. There may be a combination of the present presence, etc. of one color movement (No. 1) turned on an emergency, which has been seized;

The point of private person's judgment

1. A statement that conforms to the written appraisal of a doctor of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation into Science;

1. The facts in the judgment can be recognized by the statement corresponding thereto, etc. among the written diagnosis of death of the preparation of a written statement of intention.

The so-called judgment of the defendant falls under Article 259(1) of the Criminal Act, and the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years within the limit of the prescribed term of punishment, and one hundred and sixty-five days out of the number of detention days before the sentencing is made in accordance with Article 57 of the Criminal Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Jeon Soo (Presiding Judge)