Scope and degree of reinforced evidence

The so-called reinforced evidence supporting a confession refers not only to direct evidence, but also to all the methods of evidence sufficient to recognize that the confession is not a debrised one without indirect or circumstantial evidence.

Article 310 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 66Do634 delivered on July 26, 1966 (Kakaddd 3751 and 3752; Supreme Court Decision 14B-37 and Article 10(1)9 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea; Supreme Court Decision 69Do436 delivered on May 13, 1969; Supreme Court Decision 69Do645 delivered on August 19, 1969; Supreme Court Decision 71Do1548 delivered on November 23, 1971 (Supreme Court Decision 99Da1910 delivered on September 19, 197; Supreme Court Decision 254(34)1 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Prosecutor and Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court of the first instance (73 High Gohap574)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for life.

Goods entered in the attached list (Evidence Nos. 1 through 12) seized shall be confiscated.

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is as follows: (a) the court below rendered a verdict of innocence against the defendant on the ground that there is no reinforced evidence on the part of the facts charged; (b) however, it is admissible as reinforced evidence, not only direct evidence, but also circumstantial evidence; (c) in this case all the remaining facts of the facts charged may serve as evidence of the crime of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of acts of the defendant.

First of all, the defendant and his defense counsel's grounds for appeal are sufficient to acknowledge facts of each crime at the time of original adjudication, and there are no errors in law. Thus, there are no grounds for appeal that the facts of the crime committed against the defendant are due to mistake of facts in the court below's decision. Also, the state secrets include all the matters of interest in Korea, such as the trend of public deliberation throughout the politics, economy, society, etc. in Korea, the development of industry, the progress of major national projects, etc., and it cannot be said that it was published in domestic and overseas newspapers. Thus, it cannot be said that the state secrets are not state secrets because the contents and progress of the subway construction in Seoul Metropolitan Government, the size and promotion contents of the subway, the size and appraisal of North Korea by the people in South Korea, and the fact that the defendant collected and divulged the facts by legitimate evidence, and the defendant and his defense counsel's grounds for appeal cannot be justified. Thus, there are no errors in the misapprehension of law.

Next, among the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, if the confession of the defendant was the only evidence against the defendant with respect to any crime committed against him, it shall not be admitted as evidence of guilt. As such, Article 310 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the confession of the defendant cannot be admitted as evidence of guilt. Only if there is another evidence that infringes on the confession back, the crime can be admitted, or if there is another evidence that infringes on the confession back, it means not only direct evidence but also all methods of evidence sufficient to recognize that the confession is not permissible without giving indirect evidence or circumstantial evidence, and it means all methods of evidence sufficient to recognize that the confession is not permissible. In this case, if the court below knew that the defendant was a counter-party 1 to detect and collect the State secrets of the Republic of Korea on May 1970, it is sufficient that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the confession of the defendant, which is the current address of the defendant 2, who is an "Seoul Kong", as well as the name and address of the defendant, and it is sufficient that the court below has aided the confession of the above facts.

The criminal facts and evidence acknowledged as a member of a member of a political party are the criminal facts of the crime 7th day of May 1970, which the defendant received correspondence from Non-Indicted 1, and around that time, at his office "Singing Hong Kong", he met him at his office, and thereafter thereafter "Sing Hong Kong", and confirmed the present address and origin of the Non-Indicted 2 of the Party 2, and examined the list, address, telephone number, and trends of other supporters, and notified him of his intention to find and collect national secrets as a member of the member of the public organization in North Korea, and confirmed the country secrets as the member of the member of the member of the public organization in North Korea, with the knowledge that he would have known that he would want to find and collect the state secrets as the member of the member of the public organization in North Korea, from his air and the first day of June 1, 1970 to the first day of 08:00 on the first day, at around 13:00 on the same day, the name and address of Non-Indicted Party 3 (70).2).

A. Non-Indicted 2: The South Korean origin and the 35 years of age have worked at the present office, and according to the written verdict, the South Korea is going to go to the present office. The phone number on the list is called the person who was called before the phone number.

B. Non-Indicted 3: The president of the People's Republic of China has been injured for a long time, and the denial is also a Chinese person, who is qualified as a Korean, English, and Chinese interpreter at the Hong Kong's Government Administration, and is a leading person.

(c) The present year: A person who arranges the President of the Republic of Korea, and a person commissioned by the U.S. parent company, imports Magna from Korea and exports to the U.S. by creating the Magian uniform in Hong Kong, and as a Korean business entity, the Korean business entity is active.

D. Non-Indicted 4: The amount of 50 years of age from North Korea and the leader of the teaching staff, who is a leading seal.

E. Non-Indicted 5: The active trade has been killed.

F. Non-Indicted 6: Seoul origin, 52 years old and sincere, and trade is also well-known.

G. Non-Indicted 7: Gisung origin, 65 years of age, f5 years of age, flives, and flives due to the lack of children.

(h) the best type of paper: a public performance in place, including, but not limited to, “cocks”, “phishing”, and “sumana”, by inviting the Republic of Korea Foundation;

In addition to the statement, the report stating the address and telephone number of the above people was made and sent to Nonindicted Party 1 by air around 15:00 on a day, and the report was made by Nonindicted Party 1 to the North Korean office, and the report was received from Nonindicted Party 1 to the Meisher in the last six months after which he reported it to the North Korea, and the report was received, and it was aided by receiving US$ 1,500 under the pretext of repair expenses and so on to facilitate the activities of Nonindicted Party 1 to the North Korean Spher and aiding and abetting the activities of Nonindicted Party 1. This is the same as the judgment of the court below except for the evidence of the court below that conforms to or supports the above criminal facts

Article 6 (4) and (3) of the National Security Act; Article 2 of the National Security Act; Article 3 (1) of the Criminal Act provides all the crimes except for the State secrets; Article 5 of the National Security Act provides all the crimes to an anti-government organization; Article 6 (4) and (4) of the same Act; Article 6 of the same Act provides all the crimes to an anti-government organization upon receipt of an order from an anti-government organization; Article 2 of the National Security Act provides all the crimes to detect, collect, or divulge the State secrets; Article 3 (1) of the same Act provides all the crimes to an anti-government organization; Articles 7 and 2 of the National Security Act; Article 98 (1) of the same Act provides all the crimes to an anti-government organization; Article 8 of the same Act provides all the crimes to an anti-government organization; Article 7 and Article 3 (1) of the National Security Act provides all the crimes to an anti-government organization; Article 5 of the same Act provides the remaining crimes to an anti-government organization; Article 6 (1) of the National Security Act provides all the crimes.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

[Attachment List omitted]

Judges Jeon Soo-soo (Presiding Judge)