beta
Text
All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor;
A. The Defendants alleged that there was no fact that they take the victim's bags toward Defendant B's bags and bring them up, and that they did not take the cash in the victim's bags. However, it is difficult to believe such argument in that Defendant B did not possess the bank on the same day, and that the victim was in custody of approximately KRW 900,000,000 after the Defendants got back to the bank of this case, and the said KRW 90,000 was no longer available after the Defendants got back to the bank of this case, and therefore, the Defendants were deemed to have taken out the cash of KRW 90,00,000,000,000, which is owned by the victim. However, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the Defendants, which acquitted the Defendants, is erroneous in the misapprehension
B. Since the fact that Defendant B entirely caused the injury to Defendant B, having almost the same body and head with each other at the same time as the victim, and the situation was terminated as a control of the surrounding person, it cannot be justified as it constitutes a fighting that is not an excessive defense, but an excessive defense.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of special larceny, the evidence that there is a criminal fact in the criminal procedure should be presented by the prosecutor. Even if the defendant's appeal is unreasonable and the defendant's appeal is false, it cannot be disadvantageous to the defendant. The proof of the criminal fact should be made by the judge to have a high probability to recognize high degree of probability to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form a conviction to the extent that there is no evidence to establish such a degree, the suspicion of guilt is against the defendant.
Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do163 Decided November 30, 2007, etc.). Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment’s acquittal portion against the Defendants in light of relevant evidence and records, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning.