beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court below on the erroneous determination of facts, in full view of the following facts: (a) the confession made by the defendant to an investigative agency on the part of the judgment of the court below is specific and specific as the method of crime, and the statement made by G investigation agency is clear and specific; and (b) the above statement made at the fifth day from the date of the occurrence of the instant case at the point of time; (c) on the other hand, G’s legal statement made at the time when about 80 days elapsed from the date of occurrence
B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two months of imprisonment, six months of imprisonment, additional collection of 1100,000 won) is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. On May 7, 2019, the lower court made a statement to the effect that the Defendant led to confession of this part of the facts charged (in the original court, denied this part of the facts charged), but the Defendant, at the time of repeated investigation in April 2019, stated his accomplices or his statement in detail as to the crime of other medication, which had been repeatedly conducted on or around April 2019, but reversed his statement to the same effect as he first stated that he would be aware of this part of the crime, and reversed his statement to the effect that the Defendant would be aware of this part of the crime, and the circumstances leading to the medication were also the same as that of the previous crime of medication. However, the Defendant made a statement to the effect that the phonephone, which was administered, remains in the same way as that of the previous crime of medication, was dried, and it is difficult to view the credibility solely based on the confessions, such as the date and place of the receipt of this part of the facts charged, without specifying it.
The defendant has already administered philophones. The amount is that the defendant had already been administered.