The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. On the summary of the grounds for appeal, since the statement made in the investigation agency of the defendant B in the defendant B was made in a particularly reliable state (hereinafter “specific state”), the admissibility of evidence is recognized pursuant to Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the lower court erred by misapprehending the admissibility of evidence.

In addition to the statements made by B in investigation agency, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts of this case, even though it has sufficiently proved the facts charged, such as the victim’s statement, etc.

2. Determination

A. As to the admissibility of evidence of the interrogation protocol of B prepared by the investigative agency, C, the complainant, submitted a written complaint to the effect that B and C, “publically recruited,” the children of “C,” have resolved the case of forced confinement of themselves to the church, etc., and made a statement at the investigative agency as the complainant.

B was investigated two times in the police as suspect status, and in the prosecution, it was conducted on March 31, 2018 in the police interrogation and the prosecution interrogation.

The public prosecutor shall not prosecute the facts charged that he/she, through criminal investigation, defrauds the complainant by deceiving him/her to a different content between B and the accused.

1. Defendant B, while lodging and serving as a volunteer at the K Diplomatic Association, was aware of the existence of the property of the victim C who had been provided medical care in the above church, and then moved the victim’s wife to another place, and then resolved the problem that was detained in the above church, Defendant B acquired the amount of money equivalent to KRW 48,804,970 through 109 times from May 8, 2015 to July 26, 2015.

2. On June 8, 2015, Defendant A, upon introduction of the victim through Defendant B, by deceiving the victim into the old room that he/she would prepare for a new forum of the victim, and acquired the victim by remitting KRW 24 million to the Defendant’s account under the name of Defendant B.

30,000

In other words, B and the defendant.