The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal recognized that the Defendant did not have the authority to open the letters written in the facts charged but opened them. Thus, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Article 316(1) of the Criminal Act provides that a person who opens a sealed or other secret instrument, document, or drawing shall be punished by imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not more than three years or by a fine not exceeding five million won.

In this context, the “mail, etc.” subject to opening refers to a letter without the right of the defendant to open. While the defendant recognizes the opening of a letter written in the facts charged, he/she has the right to open the letter consistently from the investigative agency to the court below.

recognized that he had been aware

The intention is denied by asserting.

In a case where a criminal defendant denies the criminal intent, which is a subjective element, by means of proving indirect or circumstantial facts having considerable relevance with the criminal intent in light of the nature of the subject matter, and what constitutes indirect facts having considerable relevance should be determined by means of rational determination of the link of facts based on the close observation or analysis power based on normal empirical rule.

Meanwhile, the finding of guilt in a criminal trial ought to be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. As such, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach such a level of conviction, the determination ought to be based on the benefit of the defendant even if there is a suspicion of guilt.

B. Examining the above legal principles in light of the above paragraph (a), the lower court is going to render the circumstances in its reasoning (referring to the circumstances in paragraphs (2) (1) through (5) of the lower judgment).