Cases against the rules of evidence, which are against the rules of evidence, are employed as evidence without examining the evidence record of the preparation of a certified judicial scrivener who is not admissible as evidence.

Since documentary evidence is one of the evidence, if only a part of the suspect interrogation protocol or examination protocol of the suspect is discovered in the verification of documents, and the protocol of examination of the witness is drawn up, it will be inadmissible as evidence of legitimate verification protocol.

Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

The Army Headquarters of the first instance, the common military law of the Army Headquarters of the second instance, and the High Military of the second instance, the High Military of the second instance, July 15, 1969.

We examine the Defendant’s grounds of appeal:

The first instance court, which maintained the original judgment, adopted the evidence verification protocol (record and evidence) of a commissioned judicial scrivener as evidence to recognize the criminal facts of the defendant.

However, since it is difficult to submit documentary evidence as a whole, if it is allowed to verify documentary evidence by a commissioned judicial scrivener due to some difficult circumstances, the commissioned judicial scrivener shall verify what kind of documentary evidence has been written in the documentary evidence and the military court meeting shall conduct the examination of evidence pursuant to the examination protocol. However, according to the examination protocol of evidence by the above commissioned judicial scrivener, the examination protocol by the judge in the Busan District Court and Busan District Public Prosecutor's Office's respective investigation records, the examination protocol by the prosecutor, the examination protocol by the suspect, and the examination protocol by the witness is not entirely proved, but all of the entries in each examination protocol are not proved. In particular, the part of the prosecutor's opinion was first discovered as an emphasis on each examination protocol by the judge and the public prosecutor's statement, or by each person who made a statement was aware of what fact was presented or denied, and as a result of examination, it cannot be found that there was sufficient evidence to prove the facts that the above investigation was conducted in violation of the rules of evidence.

Justices Cho Gi-chul (Presiding Justice)