The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On October 5, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 09:55, on the part of the victim E (n.e., the 48 years old) located in the D market located in the Busan Northern-gu, Busan Northern-gu, the Defendant placed the victim’s gate back to the upper part of the victim’s “F” room, which was operated by the victim E (n.e., the 48 years old), leading the victim to fall into the livelihood room, thereby leaving the victim’s back to the upper part of the upper part of the victim’s tight, etc., leading the victim into approximately three weeks of treatment.

2. Determination:

A. The Defendant’s defense counsel consistently stated the date and time and place indicated in the facts charged to the police, the prosecution, and the prosecution, and the court of law that did not interfere with the victim’s etc. by hand, and the victim was sleeped due to the bottom of the floor so that the victim exceeded his own discretion.

B. In order to recognize admissibility as evidence with factual relevance to the result of the examination of the detection device for the final time detection, first, a change in a certain psychological condition occurs, second, a change in the psychological condition must cause a certain physiological reaction, third, the biological reaction must be determined accurately whether the person is false or not, and third, the determination of whether the last biological reaction is false or not shall be a device that can accurately measure the physiological reaction of the person who has consented to the examination of the final time detection device. In particular, the determination of whether the last biological reaction is false or not shall be a device that can accurately measure the biological reaction of the person who has consented to the examination of the final time detection device. The determination of the contents of the measurement of the detection device should be made reasonable, and it shall be possible to secure accuracy only if the inspector has objective, accurate and accurate ability to read, so long as the above conditions are not satisfied, the admissibility of the results of the examination of the final time detection device cannot be granted under the Criminal Procedure Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do1326, May 26, 2006).