The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Considering the facts charged against the Defendants in light of theO, A, and victims’ statements, the Defendants’ statements, and the size of profits acquired by the Defendants, there was a willful negligence in aiding and abetting the Defendants.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants on the ground that it is not sufficient to recognize the Defendants’ willful negligence.

2. Considering the difference between the method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court and the appellate court in accordance with the spirit of the substantial direct examination principle adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first instance judgment solely on the ground that the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s judgment, in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or that the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance is clearly erroneous, taking into account the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted until the time of closing argument in the appellate court.

In particular, in the case of evidence supporting the facts charged, even though the first instance court, which directly observed the appearance and attitude of the witness who directly observe the witness's statement while proceeding the witness examination procedure, finds it impossible to recognize the credibility of the witness's statement, the appellate court may reverse it and determine the credibility of the witness's statement, the first instance court's ruling rejecting the credibility of the witness's statement should be sufficient and acceptable.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2016Do5412 Decided June 15, 2018). The lower court is zero.