beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence attached to the facts charged in the instant case’s summary of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the victim was injured by the Defendant’s act can be sufficiently recognized.
2. Determination
A. The recognition of facts constituting an offense in a criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence of probative value, which leads to a judge to have a reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that such conviction would lead to the prosecutor’s above conviction, the determination should be made in the interests of the defendant even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable dismissal.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14487, Apr. 28, 2011). In addition, in a case where the first instance court rendered a judgment not guilty of the facts charged on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to exclude reasonable doubt after undergoing the examination of evidence, such as the examination of witness, in light of the fact that the criminal appellate court has the character as a post-trial trial even after deceiving the Defendant, and the spirit of substantial direct cross-examination under the Criminal Procedure Act, etc., the first instance court may raise probability or doubt as to the facts that
Even if it does not reach the extent of sufficiently resolving the reasonable suspicion caused by the first instance trial, such circumstance alone alone alone is insufficient to readily conclude that there was an error of misunderstanding of facts in the judgment of the first instance court that there is insufficient proof of a crime, and thus, it cannot be found guilty of the charge (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do11428, Feb. 18, 2016). Meanwhile, in a criminal case, the injury diagnosis report may serve as a valuable evidence proving the criminal fact of the defendant along with the victim’
However, the existence of the injury and the causal relationship should also be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.