Defendant

Prosecutor

Reinforcement (prosecutions, public trials) and courtrooms (public trials)

Law Firm Manuri (LLC, Attorneys Park Tae-tae et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Daejeon District Court Decision 2014Gohap271 Decided June 10, 2015

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for life.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

In misunderstanding of facts: Although the defendant could fully recognize the fact that he intentionally caused the instant accident and murdered the victim and acquired the insurance money by pretending the instant accident as a mere traffic accident, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and not guilty of the facts charged.

2. Ex officio determination

The prosecutor maintains the original facts charged at the trial, and partly amends the facts charged for murder as stated in the revised facts charged as follows: (a) add the ancillary facts charged as stated in the following “additional facts charged” to the facts charged; and (b) applies for modification of an indictment to which Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act applies to the facts charged; and (c) this court permitted the application for modification of an indictment to which “Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 2

However, although the judgment of the court below has the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the previous facts charged about murder and the revised facts charged are identical to the main facts charged. Since the part concerning the changed main facts charged in the judgment of the court below is included in the changed main facts charged, the prosecutor's appeal against this part of the judgment of the court below shall be made the object of the judgment of the court in spite of the change in indictment with the reasons for appeal against fraud.

【Revised Main Prosecution】

The Defendant married with Nonindicted 19, the first denied on October 9, 1998, but the agreement was married on April 3, 2001. On September 26, 2005, the Defendant married with Nonindicted 9, the second denied on September 26, 2005, but divorced by the court’s recommendation for reconciliation on April 4, 2007. At the time of January 21, 2008, the Defendant married with the victim of ○○○ (n, 24 years, 7 months of age) (n, 24 years of age, and 7 months of age). The victim was named from “foreign name omitted)” on March 12, 2014 as “Nonindicted 20.”

피고인은 2008. 6. 20.경 피보험자를 피해자, 수익자를 피고인으로 하는 ♡♡생명 무배당 유니버셜CI보험에 가입하고, 2014. 6. 5.경 피보험자를 피해자, 수익자를 피고인으로 하고 피보험자가 사망한 경우 사망보험금이 최대 약 31억 원에 달하는 ▒▒생명 플래티넘 스마트변액유니버셜에 가입한 것을 비롯하여 그 때부터 2014.경까지 ♡♡생명, ▒▒생명, ∈∈생명, ●●● 등 11개 보험회사에 피보험자를 피해자, 수익자를 피고인으로 하는 생명보험 25개를 가입하고, 피해자의 보험료로 매달 합계 약 360만 원을 지급하여 왔다.

From around 2007, the Defendant received total of KRW 316,924,020 from an insurance company, etc. to which the Defendant and his family members joined and used them as insurance premiums, loans, living expenses, etc. due to economic difficulties such as the payment of insurance premiums, living expenses, etc., the Defendant was willing to kill the victim by forging the traffic accident for the purpose of receiving approximately KRW 9.5 billion insurance money according to the insurance contract subscribed as the insured.

On August 23, 2014, at around 03:41, the Defendant: (a) worn a safety labelling at the right side of the border of the Gyeongan Highway located in 03:41 km; and (b) the victim, who boarded on the west, driven (vehicle No. 1 omitted) a five-lane motor vehicle on the front side of the five-lane road in the condition that he/she did not wear the safety labelling; (c) discovered the fact that the 8-ton motor vehicle driven by Nonindicted Party 1 (vehicle No. 2 omitted) stops on the emergency stop zone adjacent to the five-lane road in the front direction; and (d) caused the victim to die, such as a low blood shock shock, etc., by intentionally drilling on the right side of the said cargo after the front side of the said cargo vehicle.

Accordingly, the Defendant murdered the victim.

[Additional Preliminary Facts]

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving (vehicle number 1 omitted) of Lone Star.

On August 23, 2014, at around 03:41, the Defendant proceeded along five lanes near the 335.9km of the lower side of the border road located in the river.

At the time, there are nights and vehicles driving or stopping on an expressway, so there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by driving safely by not driving a motor vehicle driving, and by safely examining the front and rear left and right left.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to drive his vehicle and was driven by Nonindicted Party 1 (vehicle No. 2 omitted) who was parked in the emergency stop zone next to the five-lane road on the front side by negligence, and received the front right part of the said Lone Star vehicle as the front right part of the said Lone Star vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the death of the victim Nonindicted 20 (e.g., 24 years of age and 7 months of age) who was on the ground of the above occupational negligence due to low blood shock, etc.

3. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The issues of the instant case

1) It is obvious that the Defendant, as the insured, subscribed to the insurance indicated in the attached Form 1 (1) as the victim, and that the victim would receive the death benefit of KRW 9.5 billion due to the death of the victim in this case or a week adjacent thereto).

It is natural that the circumstance that the Defendant would be paid large amount of insurance money due to the instant accident is difficult to see as the victim’s death does not always cause murder. However, such circumstance does not seem to be sufficient to take the motive for murdering the victim according to social norms, even if it is not hard to say that the instant accident was a traffic accident caused intentionally by the Defendant, regardless of the reason for the Defendant being insured or whether the Defendant’s economic situation was lacking.

2) After the instant accident, Nonindicted 21, a doctor, who directly examined the body of the victim, should be deemed to have suffered long-term damage to the body of the victim without an open body due to the instant accident, and accordingly, the victim was diagnosed to have died on the spot. Generally, what is the cause of death should be determined individually by the intent of the victim to conduct a death diagnosis in a specific case, in principle. As such, the above death diagnosis, which the doctor with authority and responsibility to finally determine the cause of the victim’s death as the death at the time of the instant accident, directly examined the body of the victim immediately after the instant accident, shall be respected, and it shall not be rejected without any clear and obvious counter-proof. In addition, △△△ University’s law and △△△ University’s associate professor 22, based on the medical record of the victim, should be deemed to have sustained damage to the body of the victim and caused damage to the body of the victim (where the victim died from the instant accident to the death of the victim, the victim could not be seen to have been living in the body of the victim immediately before the instant accident.

In light of such various circumstances, it is determined that there is no reasonable doubt about the fact that the victim died of the instant accident (in this regard, the circumstances cited by the court below in the different purport are all pointed out that the possibility of error is pointed out or the strictness is lowered based on drilling, etc., and the above judgment is insufficient to decide and decide).

3) In a case where it is deemed that the instant accident constitutes a traffic accident intentionally induced, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant has the intent to commit murder in full view of the following factors: (a) the motive for the instant accident; (b) the background leading up to the instant accident; (c) the degree of shock caused to the victim by the instant accident; and (d) the result of the accident that the victim actually died

4) Therefore, the key issue of the instant case is whether the instant accident is a traffic accident intentionally induced as claimed by the Prosecutor, or whether it is a traffic accident by stroke driving as claimed by the Defendant. Moreover, as long as there is no direct evidence as to whether the instant accident intentionally induced, it can be proven by proving indirect facts, etc. that are difficult to match with stroke driving, unless there is direct evidence.

B. Relevant legal principles

In a criminal trial, the conviction shall be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to cause a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, and if there is no evidence to form such a conviction, even if there is doubt that the defendant is guilty, it shall be determined as the benefit of the defendant. However, such conviction does not necessarily have to be formed by direct evidence, but is formed by indirect evidence unless it violates empirical and logical rules. Even if indirect evidence does not have full probative value as to the facts of the crime individually, if it is deemed that there is a comprehensive probative value that is not independent if comprehensive evidence is considered in mutual relation, even if indirect evidence does not have full probative value as to the facts of the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do507, Mar. 27, 2008).

Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which provides for the principle of free evaluation of evidence, provides that the probative value of evidence shall be decided by the judge's free evaluation of facts. As such, a fact-finding judge who has the exclusive right to the determination of evidence shall take into account the perception obtained in the trial proceedings in fact-finding and the evidence examined. In a criminal trial, the formation of evidence may not be necessarily formed by direct evidence, but may be based on indirect evidence, and indirect evidence shall not be individually and separately assessed, and it shall be evaluated in a comprehensive manner with mutual relation without exception from all respects, and shall undergo a thorough and inconsistent argument. The probative value of evidence shall be left to the free evaluation of judge, but the degree of the formation of evidence in the criminal trial shall be limited to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. However, it does not require that it be excluded from all possible doubt, and it does not constitute a reasonable doubt or 20 grounds for the rejection of evidence that has no probative value, and it shall not exceed the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and it shall not be included in the abstract doubt or abstract evidence.

C. The operation, etc. of the instant vehicle at the time of the instant accident that is difficult to be compatible with driving.

Considering the following circumstances comprehensively based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, since various indirect facts that are difficult to be compatible with the driving of vehicles operated by the defendant at the time of the instant accident are acknowledged, it is reasonable to view the instant accident as a traffic accident caused intentionally by the defendant.

1) A height light

A) On August 23, 2014, on the day of the instant accident, the instant vehicle entered the Busan Highway into the Busan Highway, and passed through the Seoul Tolupt around 02:45 on August 23, 2014. After that, around 03:41 on the same day, the instant vehicle started to enter the straight line of approximately 814 meters, which was a straight line of approximately 814m in length, at the right side of the expressway (vehicle No. 2 omitted) and driven by Nonindicted Party 1 (hereinafter “instant cargo vehicle”).

The CCTV, which was installed near the Yan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Area, was taken by the instant vehicle from the time of the instant accident (hereinafter “the instant CCTV images”). According to the CCTV images, the instant vehicle driven along the side (five-lane) that was prohibited from passing at the time. However, it was revealed that the instant vehicle was turned on from the point of the instant accident to the time of the instant accident, due to the raised number of the instant vehicle from approximately 422 meters after the point of the instant accident.

B) However, in light of the following circumstances, the fact that the raise, etc. of the instant vehicle at the said point is difficult to be deemed as an indirect fact that is incompatible with the driving of the instant vehicle.

(1) The raised light of the instant vehicle is not located on the left side of the driving vehicle, but on the left side of the driving vehicle, installed at a location of not less than 5 cm away from the direction near the driving vehicle to the horizontal width. In order to make the raised light, etc. of the instant vehicle operated by the driver, it is necessary to cut off the beam to the inside of the beam or to see it to the rear by a certain power.

In general, it seems not only impossible in light of the empirical rule to catch a light light from the point of view to the point of view to the point of view, but also the point of view to the point of view to the point of view because there is no marking device in that case, it is difficult for a lighter to go back to the right place, and there is no possibility that the light light will be raised in such a way as above. Meanwhile, in order to make the point of view to the point of view to be pushed a light light to the point of view to the point of view, it is difficult to keep the light light from the point of view to the horizontal point of view, rather than the vertical point of view, to have the hand of the driver, coming close to the horizontal point of view to the point of view that it is difficult to keep the light light from the point of view to the point of view to the point of view, or that it is difficult to keep the light from the point of view to the vertical point of view to the point of view to the point of view that it is close to the operation of the driver by making it close to the point of view to the above.

However, the reason why the driver was able to drive a driver while driving is that the driver's knife the driver's knife the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife, and the driver's knife's knife's knife of the driver's knife of the driver's knife.

On the other hand, in light of the fact that the gradient of the road near the road where the height, etc. of the instant vehicle was occupied by approximately 2.7∑, and since the height, etc. was increased as seen below, it seems that the road condition in the accident scene would have been easily affected by the direction behind the vehicle, it seems that the road condition in the direction of the vehicle would not have occurred easily. Furthermore, it is consistent with the empirical rule to view that the hand of the instant vehicle, which was carrying the driver’s body in the accident scene, was moving to nearly near the horizontal plane, to the extent that the hand of the instant vehicle, which was carrying the driver’s body in the future, is moving to the lower level, and then the Defendant was closed to the extent that it would have a very large change in the operation of the instant vehicle. However, as seen later, the instant vehicle does not change to the front and rear operation, such as the height, etc.

(2) As pointed out earlier, considering the fact that it is close to almost impossible to drive a motor vehicle following a driver while the driver continuously gets off a motor vehicle, it means that at least the left hand of the motor vehicle was placed a motor vehicle if the driver gets off a motor vehicle by driving a motor vehicle due to a driving on the stroke, and the driver gets off a motor vehicle (if the driver gets off a motor vehicle by driving on the stroke, it can be sufficiently assumed that the driver gets off a motor vehicle, and if the driver gets off a motor vehicle due to a driving on the stroke, it can be deemed that the driver gets off a motor vehicle (if the driver gets off a motor vehicle by driving on the stroke, the driver gets off the motor vehicle).

However, if there is a move to the extent that the driver's knife, who was carrying the driver's knife, is moving to the extent that the driver's knife is fast, it would not be easy to maintain the direction of the driver's knife at the same time, and further, it would not be more difficult to maintain the operation's knife at the same time while one knife or both knife is left for the driver's knife at a considerable speed (70 km to 80 km at a speed) on the expressway. This is more true in view of the fact that the present vehicle at the time is driving at a considerable speed (70 km to 80 km at a speed) on the expressway. However, according to CCTV video of this case, it is confirmed that the present vehicle in question knife at least 350 meters in straight line without any specific stife before and after

It is supported by the above judgment by stating that “I think it is impossible for I will take various actions such as the front, the front, and the height of the vehicle, if I will move on the right side and right side of the vehicle,” and that I would like to say that I would like to go on the right side of the vehicle, and that I would like to say that I would go on the right side and right side of the vehicle, at a point that is 800 meters later from the back of the accident. I would like to say that I would go on the right side in the latter, and that I would like to go on the right straight line in the latter without normal consciousness. I would like to say that I would like to go on the right straight line in the long state without normal consciousness, and it would be impossible for I would like to go on the front, the front, and it would be impossible for I would like to go on the right side of the vehicle.”

(3) If the instant accident caused a traffic accident intentionally by the Defendant, the Defendant has sufficient reasons for raising the vehicle level from the psychological motive to clearly confirm the situation, in the event that the Defendant finds that a heavy cargo vehicle fit for the intended traffic accident is prohibited from vehicle traffic due to the prohibition of vehicle traffic at least 4:00 p.m. on the side (five-lane) more than the side without the vehicle, and that the vehicle stops in an emergency stop zone outside the right-hand side than other vehicles (the instant vehicle was located adjacent to the intended traffic accident as well as the size of the vehicle).

In fact, the point at which the defendant raised the height, etc. is immediately immediately preceding the accident of this case, and the point at which the height, etc. is raised is also behind the public congested, as seen earlier, 422 meters away from the parked place to the straight line, and as the cargo vehicle of this case can be perceived by the land, the vehicle of this case where the passage is prohibited, and there is no different vehicle from the vehicle of this case where the view of the road of this case is obstructed by the side where the passage is obstructed by the road of this case, so it seems that the above psychological motive may have occurred (as seen in the front and rear, it is more likely to deem that the defendant was under close with the prior decision to commit the crime of this case on the day of this case).

This does not change even if it is actually acknowledged that the above situation is not effective even if the vehicle's height, etc. at the above point is not significant even if it is acknowledged that there was a psychological motive to allow the defendant to occupy the above point, etc. In addition, there is room to deem that the defendant could not know that the situation at the time of passing the above point could not have any effect even if he raised the height, etc. before he raised the height, etc.., and it is difficult to conclude that the vehicle in this case is an act of raising another attention in the situation where the vehicle in this case is rapidly approaching the freight vehicle in this case, and it is difficult to see that the vehicle in this case is not effective due to the reason that the already occupied height, etc. is not significant. In addition, it is difficult to conclude that the vehicle in this case is an expressway under speed and speed of the vehicle in the night. Considering the fact that it seems difficult for the defendant to predict that the image, such as CCTV, etc. of the vehicle in this case, it would be difficult to say that it would be an act of raising ordinary and unnecessary.

2) Whether this case’s vehicle was an emergency stopping zone after the direction of the emergency landing zone

A) The reason why the shape of the instant vehicle was changed is that Nonindicted 15 of the Daejeon and Chungcheong Branch Safety Inspection Division of the Road Traffic Authority and Nonindicted 16 of the Accident Investigation Agency of the Accident Analysis Center of the Road Traffic Safety Inspection Agency of the Daejeon and Chungcheongnam Branch, Nonindicted 15 of the Accident Investigation Division, and Nonindicted 16 of the Accident Investigation Agency of the Accident Investigation Center of the Road Traffic Safety Analysis Center was 814 meters back from the point of the instant accident. The point at which the height of the instant vehicle was increased, etc. was 422 meters back from the point of the instant accident. As above, the point at which the raised height, etc. of the instant vehicle was changed was 40 meters back from the point of the instant accident, and the reason why the raised height, etc. was changed is that the instant vehicle was pointed out to be friendly toward the right side of the direction (hereinafter referred to as “confiscing for convenience,” and in the case of objection thereto.

As above, Nonindicted 15 and Nonindicted 16 analyze the location or height of the vehicle by driving the vehicle at the vicinity of the point where the instant accident occurred and exchanging each other’s intent so that light equal to the CCTV image of this case. Even if the method is not used for the analysis of traffic accidents, it is determined that the scientific principle, which serves as the basis for the method, is very simple and scientific basis. In addition, even if the CCTV image of this case is taken at night and is not very good, it is difficult to view that the above method differs from the above, and thus, it is difficult to view that there is considerable degree of secrecy of the part that calculated the view based on the change of light, such as the height, etc. of the vehicle, and that there is considerable difference between the location and the location of the vehicle, etc. of the vehicle, and that there is no error in measuring the above degree, as seen above, in analyzing the location and distance of the CCTV to the point where it appears that it is difficult to see that there is no obstacle to Nonindicted 15 and the part of the CCTV of this case.

The above analysis opinion of Nonindicted 15 and Nonindicted 16 is consistent with the opinion of Nonindicted 17 on the appraisal, and the Defendant does not dispute the fact that the instant vehicle is prone (if the instant vehicle is not prone, it is apparent that the instant truck cannot be left to a stop on the right side of the proceeding direction).

B) However, in light of the following circumstances, this case’s vehicle can be deemed as having followed the direction after entering the emergency stop zone, and again been friendly, and it can be deemed as an indirect fact that is difficult to be compatible with driving.

(1) Based on the fact that the instant vehicle did not receive the right divers, and that Nonindicted 15 and Nonindicted 16 had been able to set the top part of the instant cargo vehicle, Nonindicted 15 and Nonindicted 16 presented an opinion that the Defendant reconfise the top part of the instant cargo vehicle, which the victim gets on board, into the left part of the instant cargo vehicle. Such an opinion is supported by the 2010 Formula 10, which was implemented additionally in the trial.

(2) Of the upper end of the instant vehicle, the part corresponding to the width from the steering 2 to the 0.96m from the steering knife of the instant vehicle is shocked to the instant cargo vehicle (On the other hand, the remainder of 0.4m (i.e., the whole length - 1.4m - the above 0.96m). The front and rear wheels of the instant vehicle which was stopped after the instant accident were in the state of 11 type, facing all the front and rear wheels of the instant vehicle, which were stopped. Considering that the structure of the instant vehicle was modified, Nonindicted 17 of the Daejeon Scientific and Investigation Institute of the National Scientific Research and Investigation Agency, “the structure of the front and rear knife at the time of the instant accident, is likely to change to the front and rear knife of the instant vehicle.” Accordingly, the part of the instant vehicle is the vehicle’s vehicle’s vehicle’s front and rear direction, which had a big impact on the right side of the instant vehicle after the instant accident.

The shocked part of the instant vehicle is corresponding to the above 0.96m width from the front wheel to the breadth of the instant vehicle. The engine rear and roof corresponding to the said part are protruding toward the direction of the instant vehicle. The instant vehicle is protruding toward the direction of the instant vehicle, as the instant vehicle is protruding toward the right side when maintaining the steering angle, it is difficult to conflict with the said direction as above. In addition, when the front side of the instant vehicle and the instant cargo vehicle are prone to the front side of the instant vehicle, it is difficult to view the instant vehicle as the front side or front side of the instant vehicle in the direction of the collision with the instant vehicle (on the front side of the instant vehicle), and the front side of the instant vehicle in the shape of the instant vehicle (on the front side of the instant vehicle) and the front side of the instant vehicle in the shape of the collision with the front side of the instant vehicle (on the front side of the instant vehicle). Therefore, it is difficult to see that the collision with the instant vehicle in the shape of the vehicle in front and front direction of the vehicle.

In regard to this, Nonindicted 17 stated in the trial court that “the same type of photograph is in the direct angle.” If it is meaningful, Nonindicted 17 marks a low photograph, the vertical part is facing the body of the vehicle, the vertical part is in front and back, and the part under the supervision is sured and sured in the front and back, and sured. If the vehicle is facing the vehicle at the right angle from five lanes to the right angle of the emergency parking zone, it is sarked and turd in the shape. The above side is narrow and turd. The distance should be maintained in a narrow and narrow range, and the distance is maintained in the bottom, and it is pointed out that this part is emphasizing this.”

On the other hand, as seen earlier, the front and rear wheels of the instant vehicle, which had been finally stopped after the instant accident, are 11 type. However, in order to become such a form, at least the instant vehicle, the front and rear wheels of the instant vehicle ought to have the right angle, which is larger than that of the right angle toward, and then to have the right angle again, she must have the right angle again. If she has to the right angle, she has to the right angle, so it is not consistent with the aforementioned front wheels form of the vehicle at the time of final stop, and if she has to the right angle, it is difficult to keep the right direction even if she had to go ahead, and thus, it is difficult to reach the right angle as seen above. In order to make the two wheel of the instant vehicle a more direction toward each of the instant cases, she should have the right angle toward each of the two directions toward the left, and it is more likely to go ahead with each of the two directions.

(3) There is no particular dispute that the speed of the instant vehicle at least 60 km per hour at the time of the instant accident. In the event that the instant vehicle is driven at an emergency parking zone with such speed, it seems difficult to create wheels with 11 square meters due to the driver’s own restoration power.

(4) According to the result of an additional Formula 1 which was implemented in the trial, where the instant vehicle only once flag, it does not coincide with the final stop condition of the instant vehicle, and only when flag is made after flaging, it is consistent with the final stop condition of the instant vehicle (However, the direction of quith in the Formula 1 was not considered in the instant Formula 1).

(5) If the accident of this case was intentionally induced a traffic accident, the Defendant, who is a driver, seems to have been able to know that the vehicle of this case, which was driven at a considerable speed (not less than 60 km) is likely to cause unpredictable results by turning the vehicle on the right side of the present vehicle, in order to avoid collision with the vehicle of this case or to avoid collision with the seat of the vehicle of this case. Furthermore, if the accident of this case was intentionally induced, the Defendant could have examined and considered the type of collision with the vehicle of this case in advance, even in order to measure and control the danger of the vehicle of this case, it seems that it would be difficult for the Defendant to know that the vehicle of this case, as far as possible, had a big impact on the vehicle of this case, by driving the vehicle of this case with the front side of the present vehicle of this case and the front side of the present vehicle of this case, it would be more likely that the Defendant had a big impact on the vehicle of this case, such as the vehicle of this case, and the vehicle of this case.

(6) Comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the shape of the instant vehicle at the point where the instant accident occurred, the length of the emergency stop zone, the distance and the interval between the point where the direction of the direction towards the direction of the direction and the direction of the direction of the direction; and (b) the situation in which the instant vehicle was frighted after being frighted or frighted, and where the height of the instant vehicle was operated at the direction of the direction of the direction after being frighted, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have been engaged in driving in the state of frighting, as seen earlier; and (c) the circumstance in which the instant vehicle was frighted after being frighted or frighted after being frighted, can be deemed to be an indirect

공소외 23도 검찰에서 ‘제가 렉카차를 운전한 것이 11년인데 저는 비상주차대에서 졸음운전 사고를 한 번도 본 적이 없다. 왜냐하면 만일 졸았다면 화물차의 측면이나 가드레일, 중앙분리대를 박고 튕겨 나가거나 아니면 교행하는 차를 박지, 포켓에 서 있는 주차되어 있는 차량을 박는 것은 정말 어렵다’는 취지로 진술하여 자신의 렉카차 기사로서의 경험을 토대로 의식적인 조향이 없는 상태에서 졸음운전으로 이 사건 사고와 같은 충돌이 일어나는 것은 그 자체로 쉽지 않다는 의견을 밝히고 있다.

3) Whether the Defendant artificially changed the speed of the instant vehicle from six parts to four parts

A) According to the appraisal written by Nonindicted 24 and Nonindicted 25 of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation, “the front part of the instant vehicle is considerably damaged by external shock, is distinguishable from the body of the vehicle at the time of appraisal,” and “the change of the front part is confirmed to be located four parts of the vehicle at the time of appraisal.”

Nonindicted 24 and Nonindicted 25 evaluated that, while conducting the aforementioned appraisal, their internal form was separated from the transformation servers and their inner form was located in the fourth end of the instant vehicle. As such, there is little possibility that the number of the transition accelerators might have been artificially fabricated despite the vehicle movement. As to this point, Nonindicted 24 explained in the original court’s “In this regard, Nonindicted 24 may move while playing a huge role in the structure, as it is possible to move, it is difficult to play a fixed role because it is separated now. Accordingly, it is difficult to change the impact of the changeer, and that it is difficult to change the number of the changeers.”

B) The instant vehicle is being moved and kept through the following routes.

〈이 사건 사고 지점 → 경부고속도로 목천IC 인근 “☆☆렉카” 사무실 → 국립과학수사연구원 대전과학수사연구소 → 위 “☆☆렉카” 사무실 → 아산시 소재 “▽▽폐차창” → 천안시 서북구 (주소 3 생략) 소재 “◎◎◎◎” 〉

그런데 이 사건 사고 당시 이 사건 차량을 견인하였던 공소외 23은 당심법정에서 ‘앞 쪽에는 바퀴를 물어서 뜨는 방식으로 견인을 했고, 뒷바퀴는 “돌리”라고 바퀴 자체를 떠서 견인할 수 있게끔 하는 특수 장비로 견인을 했습니다’, ‘현재 기억으로는 그 차량이 오토인지 스틱인지 확인도 하지 않았던 것으로 기억합니다. 앞부분이 워낙 많이 밀려들어온 상태라 스틱이 되었든 오토가 되었든 어차피 뒷바퀴는 띄워서 견인해야 할 상황이기 때문에 확인을 하지 않은 것으로 기억하고 있습니다’, ‘일단 파손이 너무 심했습니다. 기어박스 자체가 파손이 되었습니다’라고 진술하였다. 또한, 이 사건 차량을 ☆☆렉카에서 국립과학수사연구원으로 견인한 후 다시 ☆☆렉카로 견인한 공소외 26은 당심법정에서 ‘차량을 들어서 견인차 위에 올렸기 때문에 바퀴가 땅에 닿지 않은 상태에서 이동하였습니다’, ‘평상시에 움직이지 않는 고장 난 차량이라면 기어를 N으로 놔야 하는데, 그때 당시에는 차가 너무 많이 부서져서 안에 들어갈 데도 없고 해서 지게차로 뜨고 지게차로 내렸습니다’, ‘(기어를) 대충 살펴봤는데, 기어를 움직일 수 있는 수준이 아니라 업어서 갔습니다’, ‘그 과정에서 기어를 조작하거나 그럴 가능성은 전혀 없습니다’라는 취지로 진술하였다. 위와 같이 공소외 23, 공소외 26은 이 사건 차량의 바퀴를 움직이지 않고 이 사건 차량을 이동시켰고, 그 과정에서 변속기의 위치가 변경되었다고 볼만한 사정이 없으므로, 그 이동 과정에서 변속기의 인위적인 조작이나 훼손은 없었다고 보인다.

C) The Defendant stated at the lower court’s court that the change of the vehicle would be placed in six parts of the speed of the vehicle at the time of driving on an expressway. This is also a usual and general driving method. Moreover, there is no circumstance to change the change to four parts of the speed prior to driving, as the Defendant asserts. However, there is a circumstance to deem that the change of the vehicle in this case was in four parts at the time of the instant accident. In light of the six parts and four parts of the manual change period, it seems almost impossible to change the change to four parts of the vehicle in this case due to the impact coming from the front side of the instant accident. In light of these circumstances, it is difficult to deem that the change to the speed of the vehicle in this case at the time of the instant accident was in accord with an indirect fact that the change to the speed of the vehicle in this case at the time of the instant accident is in accord with the empirical rule.

4) Whether the speed of the instant vehicle has artificially increased or decreased at the time of the instant accident

A) Prior to being raised, Nonindicted 15 and Nonindicted 16 presented the opinion that the average speed of the instant vehicle at the speed of 70.5 km per hour and that the average speed of the instant vehicle at the speed of 80 km per hour after being raised. In addition, Nonindicted 15 presented the opinion that the average speed of the instant vehicle at the speed of 61.7 km through 62.6 km per hour, referring to the said video.

As seen earlier, there seems to be no particular error in measuring the “distance” between the opinions presented by Nonindicted 15 and Nonindicted 16 and the point where the distance is occupied by the height, etc., and the time when the instant vehicle proceeds between the point is measured by the CCTV image. As such, the said opinion on the speed of the instant vehicle at the time of the instant accident can be seen as having no big error.

B) As a result of the above analysis, it is consistent with the analysis and analysis by Nonindicted 27 of the head of the legal image analysis institute, who presented his opinion to the effect that the front-standing phenomenon was reduced on the instant vehicle immediately before the instant accident, and that the front-standing phenomenon was observed on the ground that the front-time situation was observed by displaying the location and height of the headlights by the frame of the CCTV and the CCTV image of this case presented to the effect that the front-standing phenomenon was high likely to be caused by the operation of the brake system. In addition, in light of the reduced point and the degree of speed, etc., even if the said section was changed from a small side of the instant vehicle, it seems that the above reduction would be in accordance with the artificial operation.

C) If the instant accident caused a traffic accident intentionally by the Defendant, the Defendant, as the case may have a psychological motive that can operate the brakes in order to effectively control the degree of impulse or shock immediately before the collision. In addition, the foregoing psychological motive is consistent with the foregoing psychological motive. In addition, given that the Defendant’s achievement of his purpose would have to create a significant shock to a certain extent, the degree of consent would not have been extremely serious. Thus, it is difficult to view otherwise solely on the ground that the instant truck driver was unable to hear the sudden shock of the instant vehicle at the time, regardless of the fact that there was no sudden skkid mark of the instant vehicle at the site of the accident, or that the instant truck driver was performing another work at the time.

D) As above, it can be deemed an indirect fact that the speed of the instant vehicle is likely to artificially reduce the speed of the instant vehicle immediately before the collision of the instant vehicle (On the other hand, the distance from Seoul Tolt to the point of the instant accident is about 67 km, and according to the Defendant’s statement, the Defendant took a rest of about 20 minutes over three occasions while moving the said section. However, the time when the Defendant passed through Seoul Tolt is about 02:45, and the time when the instant accident occurred is around 03:41,00. Thus, if the Defendant, at around 02:45, did not appear to have reached the point of the instant accident, the Defendant stated that the average speed of the instant vehicle 12 km [67 km(56 %) to reach the point of the instant accident at around 03:41, there is no doubt that the Defendant would have made such a false statement on the vehicle driving speed as above, not on the ground that the Defendant made a false statement on the vehicle driving speed.

5) Road conditions, including the vicinity of the instant accident site

A) According to the Defendant’s repeated statement, the Defendant sleeps about 10 minutes in a rest at the safe rest area. However, the straight distance from the safe rest area to the point of the instant accident is 25.8 km (Seoul Tolt to the safe rest area is 40 km), and the stormer section confirmed on the map is 8.5 km. Based on the straight line, it requires about 15 minutes if a vehicle is operated from the safe rest area to the accident site at a speed of 100 km, and about 18 minutes if it is operated at a speed of 80 km, it is predicted that the actual road would be 20 minutes if it is operated at a speed of 180 km. The first part is 1 to 35 km, the second part is 1 to 4 km, the second part is 1 to 4 km after the second 1 to 4 km, the second part after the second 2 to 1 to 4 km.

B) The circumstances revealed from the above facts, i.e., the Defendant, even if following the Defendant’s own assertion, she was sleeped in diving kynama while taking rest at the safe resting area, and the hours required at the location of the instant accident at the safe resting area are over 20 minutes before and after the said accident, and at least several minutes during the operation. In particular, the slick section frequently appeared at a short interval, and the last slick section appears at about one minute immediately before the location of the instant accident ( even according to the Defendant’s assertion, the point at which the instant vehicle was first 814 meters after the instant CCTV was slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick slick sl.

D. Other indirect facts supporting the occurrence of the instant accident

1) From the time of marriage with the victim, the Defendant concluded multiple insurance contracts with the victim as the insured and as the beneficiary mainly in the case of the victim’s death. Accordingly, the insurance premium to be paid by the Defendant around the time of the instant accident was KRW 4,262,906 per month (i.e., KRW 3,600,406 per month + KRW 662,50 per month). The insurance premium to be paid by the Defendant was also KRW 3,767,906 per month at the time of joining the instant insurance contract, which was the most adjacent to the instant accident, e.g., [Attachment 1] No. 1, 2014, Jun. 5, 2014, KRW 8, and KRW 3,767,906 per month ( KRW 4,262,906, KRW 495,00 per month).

피고인은 인구 약 5만 5,000명 정도 되는 충남 ◇◇군에서 생활용품점을 운영하고 있다. 피고인이 위 유니버셜보험계약을 체결하는 과정에서 ▒▒생명 측에 제출한 보험청약서에는 피고인의 월수입이 500만 원이라고 기재되어 있다. 피고인은 경찰에서 월수입이 700만 원이라고 주장하다가, 검찰에서 1,000만 원이라고 주장하였으며, 원심법정에서는 1,500만 원에 달한다고 달리 주장하고 있다. 피고인의 부가가치세 신고를 대신해주었던 공소외 28은 피고인이 운영한 생활용품점에서의 카드결제 내역, 현금영수증 자료, 세금계산서 자료 등에 비추어 현금거래를 포함한 월 평균 ‘매출액’이 약 1,000만 원 정도 될 것이라고 추산하면서, 여기에서 비용 등을 제외한 월수입은 1,000만 원을 하회할 것으로 보았다.

Therefore, there is sufficient room to view that the Defendant’s insurance premium to be paid at the time of the instant accident is excessive compared to the Defendant’s monthly income. Moreover, as seen earlier, the Defendant, prior to several months in which the instant accident occurred, more than KRW 495,00,00 of the monthly insurance premium again was KRW 495,00,000, and more than KRW 3,099,000,000,000 of the death insurance premium was additionally included, but it is inevitable to view the

With respect to this, Non-Indicted 12 claimed several times from around 201 to May 201, and asked the Defendant to enter into one insurance contract with the victim as the insured. At each time, the Defendant refused to enter into the victim’s resident registration certificate with the victim’s refusal to enter into the insurance contract, and subsequently made the victim’s refusal to enter into the insurance contract upon the victim’s issuance of the victim’s resident registration certificate. However, considering this point, barring any special circumstance where Non-Indicted 12 must have to enter into the insurance contract, as seen earlier, the Defendant paid a very excessive insurance premium compared with the monthly income, and even if the victim already paid a death insurance amount to the degree of sufficient and remaining as the insured, it is difficult to view that the amount of the victim’s death insurance amount as the insured and the amount of the death insurance amount is more than 3 billion won and more than 50 billion won as the insured and the amount of the insurance amount is more than 3 billion won.

2) Although the Defendant’s primary changes in the facts charged in the trial led to the deletion of the part that the Defendant was drinking water to the victim prior to the instant accident, it is true that the victim’s blood was found in the instant accident that was covered within the vehicle at the time of the instant accident, and that it cannot be seen that the victim’s blood was detected in the bloodtain. Moreover, in light of the fact that the victim’s blood is not entirely detected in the bloodtain of the victim, other ingredients than DNA is not entirely detected, and that the victim was pregnant, there is a high possibility that the victim could have consumed dihydian, i.e., a water surface guidance system, rather than dylhydrydydydydydydydydydydydydydydydyr.

The ingredients of the water surface leading agents sold in the Republic of Korea are divided into Dolosophian or Dolodridian. In the case of the former, in the case of the latter, it is produced in the form of injecting not only the luxary refining but also the liquid dythroids into a luxululululule inside the luxululululule. The pure 500ml in pure distilled water can be melted in 500ml, which is the quantity corresponding to 10,000 lux.

The Defendant made a statement at an investigative agency to the effect that “the Defendant was prepared in advance at △△△△△△△△△, and that the Defendant was salvous when he was salpous.” The Defendant made a statement to the effect that “the victim was salpous, because he was salpous when he was salpous.” The victim was pregnant at the time, so he was very careful time for taking drugs, and the fact that the victim was salpous, when salpous, or when salpous, when he was salpous by a third party. As seen later, the police did not confirm that the Defendant was salpousd at the pharmacy located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, where he was salpous, when he was salpous, that he was salpous, and that the Defendant was salpous in the process of investigating the instant case, and that there was no possibility that the Defendant was salpousd about the Defendant’s purchase of the instant body.

Considering the above circumstances comprehensively, it is most persuasive to view that ① the victim has taken a water surface guidance system in any circumstance, and ② the water surface guidance system was potable by the victim himself/herself or by a third party rather than being potable by the victim.

In addition, if the Defendant used the water surface guidance system prepared in advance for the victim, it cannot be viewed differently solely on the ground that the Defendant purchased the water surface guidance system through a way in which the trace can not be traced, and that the container containing the water surface guidance system at the time of the instant case had been abandoned. As such, it cannot be viewed otherwise solely on the ground that the Defendant did not detect DNA ingredients in the instant vehicle or the drugs seized after searching the lehydroid infection remaining in the instant vehicle or the Defendant’s home, or that the Defendant purchased the water surface guidance system at the pharmacy located in Chungcheongnam-gun-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, where the Defendant was living.

Defendant appears not to be easy to cause an intentional accident when the victim was able to be aware of, and if the victim was diving, it would be easy to easily cause such accident. Moreover, even if the victim did not die due to an accident, it is difficult to see that the victim's intentional accident is an intentional accident. Furthermore, in light of the above circumstances, it is sufficient that the Defendant is sufficiently able to deem that the victim was locked before the accident in order to cause an intentional accident. However, there is a circumstance that the victim was locked at the time of the instant case, and that it was very strong to suspect that it was caused by the water surface inducement (On the other hand, according to the inquiry report by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation and Investigative Research, which was implemented at the trial, it is difficult to readily conclude that the appraisal used in the toxic substance was a dyke of the Defendant's blood accident even if it was discovered in the broad area around the pent used to analyze the substance of this case.).

3) On August 22, 2014, the instant vehicle: (a) went through a one-lane road located in Chungcheongnamnam ( Address 4 omitted) around 21:22, 2014; (b) the Defendant and the victim were confirmed to have failed to wear a safety level mark as a result of the CCTV image reading at the time. The Defendant and the victim stated to the effect that the Defendant and the victim did not wear a safety level mark well; and (c) there was no appearance of the Defendant wearing a safety mark mark on CCTV taken from January 1, 2014 to August 22, 2014 when the instant vehicle was taken for about eight months. However, the Defendant worn a safety level at the time of the instant accident, while the victim was not wearing a safety mark.

4) 피고인은 이 사건 사고 당일 오전 11:52경 및 오후 14:48경 ◇◇◁◁장례식장 직원인 공소외 29와 휴대전화로 통화를 하였다. 이에 대하여 공소외 29는 수사기관에서 종전에 ‘피고인의 가족들이 화장을 부탁했다’는 취지로 한 진술을 번복하면서 ‘이전부터 ▷▷▷라는 모임의 회원으로 알고 있던 피고인이 위 시점에 전화를 하여 화장예약을 부탁하였고, 그에 따라 15:00경 피해자의 사망진단서를 팩스로 송부 받아 자신이 대전 ◐◐◐에 인터넷으로 화장예약을 대행하였다’는 취지로 진술하였다. 피해자의 친척들은 피해자의 부모가 ○○○○에서 한국으로 들어올 때까지 피해자의 시신을 화장하지 말자고 하면서 10일장 또는 5일장을 요구하였으나, 피고인은 피해자의 친척들에게 ‘3일장이든 5일장이든 피해자의 마지막 모습은 염하는 날만 볼 수 있으니까 3일장을 하는 게 낫다’고 설득하여 3일장이 이루어졌다. 피해자의 시신을 검시할 당시 피해자의 동생이 대전에 살고 있었음에도 피고인은 피해자의 동서인 공소외 30을 유족으로 참여시켰다.

In light of the following: (a) on the day of the instant accident on which several hours have not elapsed since the occurrence of the accident, the Defendant made a telephone call to the funeral hall employee at around 11:52 on the day of the instant accident; (b) at around 14:25 on the same day, the Defendant requested a promise for cremation again by telephone at around 14:48, the amount of 20 minutes from the finisheder who was under the direction of the prosecutor’s delivery of the body of the victim; and (c) at around 15:08 on the same day, there is sufficient room to deem that the Defendant had been engaged in cremation while leading the cremation procedure. Moreover, even according to the Defendant’s assertion, it is very reasonable to view that the Defendant could have discovered the body of the victim in light of the possibility that the victim might have discovered the body of the victim, as seen in the foregoing, while excluding the victim’s bereaved family at the hospital.

5) 피고인은 검찰에서 ‘사고 나기 2~3개월 전에 액정이 깨져서 줌 나오는 것으로 바꿨습니다. 그 전에 쓰던 거는 반납하라고 해서 반납했습니다’라고 진술하였다. 그러나 실제로는 피고인은 이 사건이 있기 약 2주 전인 2014. 8. 8. 휴대전화기를 교체하였고, 이전 전화기를 반납하지도 않은 것으로 보인다(휴대전화 가입서에 ‘미반납’으로 표시되어 있다). 한편 피고인은 이 사건 사고 발생 다음날인 2014. 8. 24. 자신의 휴대전화기를 이용하여 ‘어제교통사고’, ‘어제고속도로사고’, ‘경부고속도로사고’ 등을 검색어로 하여 뉴스를 찾아서 그 기사 내용과 첨부된 동영상을 2-3회에 걸쳐 재접속하여 확인하였다.

As above, there is a possibility that the Defendant had searched, etc. necessary for the preparation of the murder of this case using the mobile phone device previously used by the mobile phone operator in that the circumstance where the Defendant replaced the mobile phone device is not open. Moreover, as seen earlier, in the situation where the victim died due to a sudden traffic accident caused by one’s driving, and there is no yellow situation in the hospital due to one’s driving, it is difficult to view that searching the above search news or repeatedly checking the video accompanied by the contents of the article on several occasions is ordinary, and there is sufficient room to doubt that the Defendant had accessed as above, since there was a concern about the informant or the black boom video, etc. that may not be suspected even if there is any suspicion.

6) On August 22, 2014, the day before the instant accident occurred, around 11:00, around August 22, 2014, the victim reported Nonindicted 31, who is the ○○○○○○, to the head of Mana, and around 15:0, at around 15:0, the victim and Nonindicted 31, and Nonindicted 32 (the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○) came into existence with the Defendant, and the victim and Nonindicted 31, and Nonindicted 32 (the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○) promised to drink the instant ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ on August 23, 2014, the victim told Nonindicted 31 on August 22, 2014.

피해자의 사촌동생인 공소외 33(○○○○ 출신이다)은 경찰에서 ‘이전에 피해자가 친구들하고 밥을 먹기로 해놨었는데, 피고인이 계속 가자고 말을 해서 나중에는 어쩔 수 없이 “나도 살게 있으니까 가자” 이런 식으로 말한 적이 있습니다’라고 진술하였다. 공소외 31은 경찰에서 ‘저녁 8시쯤인가 통화를 했는데, 피해자가 전화를 해서 하는 말이 “남편과 서울에 갔다 와야겠다”라고 해서 제가 “배도 불렀는데 왜 같이 가냐”고 물어보니까 피해자가 하는 말이 “남편이 졸리니까 같이 가자”고 말을 해서 가야 한다고 전화로 말을 했어요’라고 진술하였다. 공소외 32는 경찰에서 ‘피해자가 평소 따라간 것은 사실이나 최근 들어 임신하여 배가 불러 따라가지 않으려고 했으며, 사고 전날인 금요일 아침 10:00경 제가 피해자의 핸드폰으로 전화를 하여 제가 “오늘 저녁시간 있냐, ○○○○ 음식을 해먹자”고 했더니 그녀가 “신랑이 서울 가서 바쁘다, 나를 태워다 줄 사람이 없어 못가니 내일인 토요일날 아침에 저희 집에 온다”고 하여 제가 농담으로 “서울 가서 구경 좀 해라”고 했더니 그녀가 “배불러 차 타는 것이 불편하여 가지 않는다”고 통화한 것이 마지막 통화였고, 그날 12:30경 제 카톡으로 “오늘 장날이니까 ○○○○ 음식 살 거 있으면 미리 사다 놓아라, 부족한 거 있으면 전화해라”고 문자를 보내어 제가 시장가서 음식을 사다 놓았어요. 그녀가 가지 않는다고 해놓고 따라 간 것이 이상해요’라고 진술하였다.

The Defendant made a statement at the investigative agency to the effect that “I would am pregnant, I would am pregnant, and I am to am her while I am her driving.” However, considering the victim’s statement as seen earlier along with the victim’s statement, the victim was a pregnant woman for the seven months of pregnancy at the time, the victim was a pregnant woman for the seven months of pregnancy, and the victim got to Seoul around August 22, 2014 by taking full account of the fact that I am to the victim around 20:0 on August 22, 2014, despite the victim’s promise, I am to Seoul, as claimed by the Defendant, rather than having the victim go to Seoul at the victim’s request, it is reasonable to view that the victim was forced to go together with the Defendant without choice due to the victim’s demand.

7) Contrary to the fact that the chief part of the instant vehicle that the victim was on board was completely congested due to the instant accident, the part of the driver’s seat on which the Defendant was on board was on board was somewhat pushed by the meter and steering gear toward the Defendant’s chest.

8) 피고인과 친분관계가 있는 공소외 3은 수사기관에서 여러 차례에 걸쳐 ‘이 사건 사고 직후 피고인을 병문안 가서 사고 당시 상황에 대하여 들은 적이 있다. 그때 피고인이 말하기를 피해자와 함께 서울로 가서 물건을 사고 고속도로를 타고 내려오는 길에 졸았다가 깼다가 이런 식으로 반복을 하는 도중에 앞에 큰 트럭이 진행하는 것처럼 보였고 이 차를 그냥 따라갔는데 사고가 났다고 말을 했다. 그리고 잠시 정신을 잃었는데 사고가 나서 정신을 차려보니 피해자가 눈감고 편안히 자고 있기에 다행이라고 생각을 해서 손으로 흔들고 깨웠는데 반응이 없었고 잠시 후 구급차가 와서 병원으로 데려갔다고 들었다’는 취지로 진술하였다. 피고인이 그가 주장하는 바와 같이 졸음운전으로 이 사건 교통사고를 낸 것이고, 그 때문에 자신의 아내가 황망히 사망한 것이라면, 굳이 자신의 지인에게 이 사건 사고의 경위를 위와 같이 자신이 알고 있는 사실과 다르게 진술할 이유가 별로 없다.

In addition, immediately after the instant accident occurred, the Defendant listened to Nonindicted 1’s statement that “I am son. I am son,” and called “I am son. I am son. I am son at the time of the instant accident.” The Defendant appears to be usual to respond to “I am son,” if I am son while driving the instant accident at the time of the instant accident. The Defendant was asked by the police officer on September 4, 2014 when I was under the first interrogation of the instant accident on September 4, 2014, when I was asked about “I am son, while I am son,” and stated to the effect that “I am son, I am son,” and “I am am son. I am am son at the time of the instant accident.”

9) The Defendant told Nonindicted 23 of the towing article Nonindicted 23, who first arrived at the accident scene for the first time, stating that “the towing article, who had arrived at the accident scene, did not notify the Defendant that he was on board until he asked the Defendant whether he was on board. Nonindicted 1 was on board. In response, Nonindicted 1 stated to the police that “I am on the back of the driver?” “I am on the back of the driver?” and that “I am on the part of the driver? I am on the part of the driver? I am on the part of the driver? I am on the part of the driver? I am on the part of the driver? I am on the part of the driver. I do not am on the part of the passenger. I did not am on the part of the passenger.”

10) The victim was pregnant four times until the time of the instant accident after the marriage with the Defendant, and the first pregnancy was performed on April 15, 2008 on the ground that he was pregnant and was under the first surgery on the ground that he was aware of the fact of pregnancy and was under the first surgery on the ground that he was under the third pregnancy. In relation to the third pregnancy, on September 15, 2011, the Defendant confirmed the pregnancy of the fourth fetus caused by the instant accident, and the Defendant confirmed that he was pregnant of the fourth fetus who was killed in the instant accident and demanded the victim to take care of pregnancy at the time of the death. The Defendant and the victim demanded that he was pregnant. The Defendant and the victim did not designate another doctor while undergoing a medical examination in relation to the fourth pregnancy, and the Defendant did not have made a statement that he would not have been her mother at the time of the Defendant’s body at the time of his death and did not her husband at the time of his death.

Comprehensively taking account of such circumstances, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant did not have any reason to kill the victim solely on the ground that the victim was expected to have given birth to the male baby.

11) As seen earlier, the Defendant would not be able to see the victim’s death by the instant accident. As an insurance company paying death insurance proceeds, this is only a serious doubt as to whether the instant accident was intentional or not. In fact, the instant case was reported by the employees of the insurance company suspected of the intentional accident.

However, the degree of such deliberation is to be proportional to whether the instant accident causes a certain degree of danger to the Defendant. Therefore, if the Defendant is not an accident that seems to cause a serious risk to a certain extent, it is highly probable that the Defendant would not avoid a precise investigation according to the above suspicion, and such circumstance seems to be difficult to predict without any special knowledge about the insurance.

On the other hand, the defendant was often coming to move to Seoul by using an expressway due to his duties and did not have many cases with the victim.A death accident due to driving on the expressway occurs in depth, and such accident is related to the above daily life of the defendant, and the unique nature of the accident is not revealed separately, and there are many opportunities to commit a crime naturally created, regardless of whether it is a practice or a practice.

In light of these circumstances, it does not mean that the Defendant intentionally caused the instant accident by means of which the Defendant may be deemed to have a considerable risk on an expressway would not significantly deviate from the common sense or be regarded as an exceptional.

12) The Supreme Prosecutors' Office’ Office’s statement and analysis specialists, Nonindicted 34 in the clinical laboratory of the Prosecutor’s Office of Scientific Investigation, Seoul National University Hospital’s Mental Health Specialists, and Nonindicted 35 in the Department of Mental Health of Seoul National University Hospital presented the opinion that “Although the Defendant was strokeed and driven by a stroke, it appears that the degree is lower than that of the general public, it would be less than that of the Defendant’s horses and the Defendant’s internal emotional sentiments. In addition, even though the Defendant expressed that he was under a good evaluation from others, it appears that the personal relationship is the stroke and lack of the ability of appraisal, which appears to be the fact that the Defendant did not have a human relationship with which the Defendant is authentic.

E. Intermediate conclusion

In this regard, the facts charged that the defendant intentionally caused the instant accident and murdered the victim and obtained insurance money from the victim company by pretending the traffic accident can be fully recognized. Nevertheless, the court below committed a mistake that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the fact that the court below acquitted the victim of the instant facts charged solely for the reasons stated in its reasoning.

The prosecutor's assertion pointing this out is with merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the above ground for ex officio reversal exists and the prosecutor's appeal is well-grounded, and the judgment below is again decided as follows (it is not judged as to the violation of the Special Act on the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, which is an ancillary charge, since it is acknowledged as the primary charge of murder).

1. homicide;

The foregoing revised facts charged are the same as the original facts charged.

2. Fraud;

On August 23, 2013, around 11:06, the Defendant received an accident from the △ University Hospital located in the △△ University Hospital located in Yongsan-si ( Address 5 omitted) to the effect that the victim Nonindicted Co. 2 caused a traffic accident by telephone to the customer center of the victim Nonindicted Co. 2. On August 29, 2014, the Defendant prepared and submitted a written claim for the payment of insurance proceeds to the non-party insurance solicitor belonging to the victim company to the non-party 2.

However, the fact was not caused by the defendant's negligence but caused the defendant's intentional accident as above.

Around September 2014, the Defendant enticed the victim company, and caused the victim company to pay Nonindicted 1, the amount of KRW 730,810, and KRW 8,060,00, and KRW 1,966,630, in total, KRW 10,757,440, in lieu of the Defendant, around October 2014, from around October 2014 to December 2014.

Accordingly, the defendant was exempted from paying the above amount of money, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the above amount of money.

1. Part of the defendant's original judgment and the oral statement in court;

1. The legal statement of Nonindicted 23, Nonindicted 26, and Nonindicted 17 of the Political Party Witness;

1. The legal statement of the witness of the court below, Nonindicted 15, Nonindicted 16, Nonindicted 23, and Nonindicted 3

1. Each prosecutor’s statement on Nonindicted 32, Nonindicted 31, Nonindicted 33, and Nonindicted 36, Nonindicted 12, and Nonindicted 14, and Nonindicted 28

1. Each police protocol on Nonindicted 1, 30, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 10, and 11

1. 의사 공소외 21이 작성한 피고인에 대한 사망진단서, 의사 공소외 42가 작성한 공소외 20에 대한 진단서, 의사 공소외 43이 작성한 피고인에 대한 소견서, 원심법원의 검증조서, 경찰 교통사고보고(실황조사서), 경찰 검시조서, 국립과학수사연구원 대전과학수사연구소 이화학과 감정인 공소외 44가 작성한 감정서(피해자 혈흔에서 수면유도제 검출), 충남지방경찰청 사이버수사대 디지털증거분석실 증거분석관 공소외 45가 작성한 디지털 증거분석 결과보고서(피의자 휴대폰), 도로교통공단 대전·충남지부 안전조사검사부 사고조사연구원 공소외 15 및 도로교통공단 교통사고종합분석센터 사고분석개선처 사고조사연구원 공소외 16이 작성한 교통사고 분석서, 국립과학수사연구원 대전과학수사연구소 이화학과 감정인 공소외 44가 작성한 감정의뢰회보(차량 내 물품 감식), 국립과학수사연구원 대전과학수사연구소 법의학과 감정인 공소외 46, 공소외 47, 공소외 48이 작성한 감정의뢰회보(에어백·이불·유리 혈흔 감정, 공소외 40 구강 채취), 국립과학수사연구원 대전과학수사연구소 이화학과 감정인 공소외 44, 공소외 49, 공소외 50이 작성한 감정의뢰회보(차량 유리, 에어백 혈흔) 및 감정서, 국립과학수사연구원 대전과학수사연구소 이화학과 감정관 공소외 17이 작성한 감정의뢰회보(사고분석 종합), 국립과학수사연구원 광주과학수사연구소 이공학과 감정관 공소외 24, 공소외 25가 작성한 각 감정의뢰회보, 대검찰청 과학수사담당관실 진술분석관 임상심리전문가 공소외 34, 전문수사자문위원 서울대학교병원 정신건강의학과 교수 공소외 35가 작성한 임상심리평가 결과 통보, 법영상분석연구소장 공소외 27이 작성한 감정결과회보, △△대학교 법과대학 석좌교수 공소외 22가 작성한 감정서, 위 공소외 15가 작성한 감정결과 회신(CCTV 영상 속도 분석), △△대학교 의과대학 응급의학교실 교수 공소외 51이 작성한 의견서, 피의자 피고인 가족관계증명서 등, 피해자·피의자 진료기록, 출동 및 처치기록지, 교통사고처리 협조요청서 및 보험금 지급청구서 등, 공소외 20 보험금 지급예상액 일람표, 공소외 20 보험금 지급예상액 상세일람표, 병록일지 사본, 각 녹취록, 각 보험사별 대출금 잔액 현황자료, 2014. 8. 23. ~ 2014. 8. 24. 피고인 전화통화 발신 내역, 기타녹음 대화내용 녹취록, 진료기록지(공소외 20), 진료차트(공소외 20), 모바일 분석보고서 제459쪽, 제460쪽, 각 문서제출명령 회신(▲▲, ●●●, ■■■■생명, ▒▒생명), 각 금융거래정보 제출명령 결과(■■■■생명, ◆◆◆◆◆ 중앙회, ★★손해보험, ∈∈생명, ▼▼▼▼▼생명, ◀◀◀◀생명, ▶▶생명, ▒▒생명, ♠♠생명, ♡♡생명), 각 검찰 수사보고(피해자 공소외 20 화장경위 확인, 사고 당일 피의자의 보험회사 사고 접수 통화 사실 관련, 2014. 6. 5.자 종신보험 가입 관련 공소외 12 진술 추가 보고, ♤♤산부인과 최종 진료 후 차기 내원일 예약사실 없음, 피의자 피고인과 ◇◇◁◁장례식장 직원 공소외 29 간의 통화내역 확인, 피해자 공소외 20 시신 화장 경위, 이 사건 생활용품점 부가가치세 및 종합소득세 신고서 사본 첨부, 안성휴게소에서 사고지점 간 거리산출·커브구간 개수 확인, 공소외 12 진술 청취 보고), 각 경찰 수사보고(사고영상 확인, 피의자 명의 휴대전화, 출동 소방관 탐문, ◇◇경찰서 CCTV 판독, ◈◈◈◈ 병원 및 ◐◐◐ 화장터 탐문, 보건소 및 ◇◇군청 방문 수사, 통화내역, 보험관련, 국과수 혈흔 분석, 수면제 성분 검출, 피의자 차량 통과내역상 안전벨트 착용 여부, 피의자 피고인 스마트폰 증거분석 결과 사진 첨부, 피고인 통화내역상 서울 기지국 확인, 국과수 회신자료 종합, 피의자의 생활용품점에 설치된 단말기 매출실적, 피의자 피고인 기업은행 통장 관련, 도로교통공단 시뮬레이션 영상·일반적인 졸음운전 사고 영상, 사건당일 피의자 차량 서울 톨게이트 통과시간 확인, 보험금 증액 73억 → 95억, 피해자의 귀화 전 인적사항 확인, 수면유도제 성분이 체내에 머무는 시간 관련, 사건발생 시간, 디펜히드라민 성분이 포함된 혈흔에 대하여, 안성휴게소에서 사고지점까지 거리, 피의자 계약대출 현황, 차량결함여부 감정결과), 경찰 수사협조의뢰(☆☆▣▣소방서 - 구급일지, △△대학교, 부가가치세, 경찰 수사협조의뢰 및 회신(건축물·토지 보유 등), 현장사진, 사고영상 캡처사진, 사진 8장, 시뮬레이션·졸음운전 영상 CD, 구조영상 CD, 이 사건 CCTV 영상 CD, 안성휴게소부터 사고 지점까지의 도로현황 영상 CD, 별책 보험가입 내역 회신자료, 별책 금융거래정보 회신자료, 별책 휴대폰 기지국 회신자료, 교통사고 감정서 회신, 교통사고 감정서, 각 사진, 도로교통공단 교통사고종합분석센터 작성의 교통사고분석 감정회신서, 국립과학수사연구원의 사실조회회보서, ☆☆렉카에 대한 사실조회회보서

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 250(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of Murder, Selection of Life Standard) and Article 347(1) (Frauds and Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

The former part of Article 37 and Article 38(1)1 of the Criminal Act

1. Scope of legal applicable sentences: Life imprisonment;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] Type 3 (Influorous homicide) (Influorious homicide)

[Special Aggravations] Aggravations: A planned murder crime

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of not less than 18 years, not less than life imprisonment

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment for life;

가. 피고인은 자신의 아내인 피해자를 피보험자로 하여 95억 원에 달하는 거액의 사망보험금을 지급받을 수 있는 보험에 가입되어 있음을 기화로 치밀한 계획 하에 교통사고를 가장하여 피해자를 살해하고, 이를 단순한 교통사고로 가장하여 보험금을 편취하였다. 살인죄는 어떠한 방법으로도 피해 회복을 할 수 없는 가장 소중한 가치인 사람의 생명을 빼앗는 중차대한 범죄이다. 특히 이 사건의 경우 피고인이 사망보험금을 수령하려는 물욕(물욕)을 앞세워 자신의 아내를 살해하였다는 점에서 책임이 더욱 무겁다. 피해자는 ○○○○인으로서 피고인과 혼인하여 한국으로 온 후 피고인이나 시댁에 별다른 문제를 일으키지 않았고, 남편인 피고인을 믿고 의지하면서 타국에서 나름대로 성실히 생활하다가 영문도 모른 채 믿었던 남편에 의하여 생명을 잃었다. 더욱이 피해자가 당시 피고인의 태아를 임신한 상태였던 점에 비추어 보면 피해자의 처지가 더욱 애처롭고 피고인의 악성이 한층 더 두드러진다고 아니할 수 없다. 피해자가 이국에서 잘 살고 있다고 믿고 있던 피해자의 유족은 피해자가 황망하게도 남편의 손에 죽임을 당하였다는 점이 밝혀짐으로써 이루 말할 수 없는 슬픔과 고통을 겪게 될 것으로 보인다. 그럼에도 불구하고 피고인은 시종일관 범행을 전면 부인하면서 진지한 반성의 태도를 보이지 않고 있고 피해자의 유족에게 속죄하는 자세도 보이고 있지 않다. 이와 같은 사정에 비추어 보면, 피고인을 우리 사회에서 무기한 격리함이 결코 무거운 형이라고 할 수 없다.

B. However, inasmuch as the death penalty is a very cold punishment that deprives of human life and that it is extremely exceptional punishment that may be presented by the judicial system of the pacific society, the sentence of death penalty should be permitted only when there are special circumstances that anyone can be deemed justifiable in light of the degree of responsibility for the crime and the purpose of the punishment. In this case, in light of the aforementioned various circumstances, the prosecutor’s assertion that the death penalty should be imposed on the defendant in light of the aforementioned various circumstances, even though there is no doubt as to the defendant’s age, family relations, criminal records, the defendant’s subjective maliciousness, and the possibility of edification, etc., it is difficult to see that the above reasons alone do not constitute a special circumstance to the extent that a sentence of death penalty on the defendant can be deemed justifiable, and it cannot be said that the sentence of death penalty is intended to be imposed.

C. Therefore, it is reasonable to impose punishment corresponding to the crime committed by the Defendant by smoothly isolationing the Defendant from the society by living for life, and defend the society by immediately setting up the social justice and personal wheels, while allowing the Defendant to participate in a lifelong meeting with the victim who has lost his/her valuable life close to the Defendant and his/her bereaved family members and commit a crime of deceiving his/her wrongness. Thus, within the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, the sentence shall be determined as per the order against the Defendant.

[Attachment]

Judges Yoon Jin-hun (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Judge)

1) The sum of the death insurance proceeds for the victim is 9.5 billion won as shown in the attached Table 1 (1). However, considering the fact that the victim’s death insurance proceeds are paid periodically to a certain amount among the victim’s death insurance proceeds, and some insurance proceeds are paid to the victim’s other statutory successors as well as the defendant, the amount of the insurance proceeds actually received by the defendant may be underlined. However, even if considering this point, it does not change that the insurance proceeds that the defendant is able to receive as a result of the victim’s death in this case are very large amounts.

Note 2) The lower court’s 12 pages and 40 pages.

Note 3) Since the end part of the driver’s seat, among the collision part of the instant vehicle corresponding to the primary shocking point, the ebbbrance will depend on the weight rather than that of the vehicle, if there is such a conflict, the ebrance will act in the direction of half.

4) The above amendment of a bill of amendment appears to have been made in the purport that only the core part of the charges of murder was stated. The prosecutor, despite the amendment of a bill of amendment, has maintained the argument that the circumstance that the defendant can see the victim as having taken the water surface guidance is sufficiently recognized and that it is a critical circumstance supporting the murder.

Note 5) In general, it is known that the dryllogic ingredient may be detected in blood from 3 to 5 days after ingoting.