The case holding that the defendant was acquitted on the ground that the victim's statement about the criminal was insufficient to readily conclude the defendant as the criminal defendant immediately due to the lack of accuracy and credibility of the victim's statement in light of the circumstances in which the victims became the defendant as the criminal offender.

The case finding the defendant not guilty on the ground that the victim's statement that the victim selected the defendant as a criminal did not properly observe the procedure to enhance credibility in the criminal identification procedure, and that the police did not have any particular proviso to suspect the defendant as the criminal and requested the confirmation of the defendant since the defendant was deemed similar to the defendant, since the victim's report the defendant and confirmed that the victim was not aware of the criminal's identity, and that the same statement was not repeated, the victim's statement alone cannot be readily concluded as the criminal defendant immediately.

Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Oral interference

Law Firm Barun Law, Attorneys Lee Dong-pop et al.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of the facts charged in this case

The defendant is a person working as an engineer belonging to the Seoul Urban Railroad Corporation, and the defendant has resolved to commit sexual assault or to take away money and valuables by inducing women who wish to attend a prompt assistance system through the Internet telephone room;

(a) At around 18:00 on the first day of January 2002, the victim 1 (the victim 14 years old) who became aware of through the Internet telephone room around that time in Seongbuk-gu Seoul Malar 1's lebane knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife, which is a deadly weapon held by the defendant at the end of the sex relationship with the defendant at the end of the sexual relationship with the above victim, and the knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife.

B. At around 15:00 on July 200, the victim was 100,000 won in cash in consideration of sexual intercourse, so that the victim 2 (the victim 14 years of age) was fluored by the above Liberasia room and her female was placed on the bend, and the telephone line connected with the her hold of the telephone line with the her arm's length knick line, which is a deadly weapon in possession of the her possession of the her arm's length knife and knife, "the knife, knife, knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif knif knif knif kn's k's's k's.

다. 2002. 7. 중순 일자불상 16:00경 성관계의 대가로 현금 100,000원을 주겠다고 유혹하여 피해자 피해자 3(여, 15세)를 서울 성북구 동선동 92-7 소재 아비숑모텔 호실 불상으로 데리고 가 소지하고 있던 흉기인 칼날길이 약 15㎝의 부엌칼을 그녀의 목에 들이대고 "조용히 해라."고 위협하면서 철사줄로 그녀의 양 손목과 양 발을 묶어 반항을 억압한 후 그녀의 상의 주머니에 있던 현금 100,000원을 꺼내어 가 이를 강취하고, 계속하여 욕정을 일으키고 반항이 억압되어 있는 그녀의 하의를 벗기고 피고인의 성기를 그녀의 항문에 삽입하려다가 그녀가 고통을 호소하자 소지하고 있던 청색 테이프를 그녀의 입에 붙인 상태에서 1회 간음하여 그녀를 강간하고,

D. On February 1, 2002, the victim 4 (100,000 won in cash in return for the sex relationship by the above method) was fleeped by the victim 1 in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, 1 in his knife with the knife of 16cm in length, which is a deadly weapon held by the Seongbuk-gu 1 in his own knife and knife the knife with the knife of his woman, and cut off the telephone line connected with the knife with the knife with the knife, and cut off the knife with the knife with the knife's knife's knife's knife's knife's knife's knife's knife's knife's knife's k.

E. In the above way, the victim 4 had been inducedd to the above Ramerar room by influoring the victim 4 in a fluorial manner, and had sexual intercourse with the victim, and forced the victim to take 50,000 won in cash on the wall of the female by threatening the victim to "I Ra. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d.

2. Details of the defendant's lawsuit;

The defendant consistently used the Internet telephone room as stated in the facts charged by the police to the past, but the victims are all deemed to have been first, and the above facts charged are denied by asserting that there is no fact that the victims were the victims.

3. Determination

However, as shown in the facts charged of this case, the defendant's statement 2, 3, and 4 of the victim 2, 3, and 4 of the suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant, each prosecutor's statement of the victim 1, 2, 3, 4 of the suspect interrogation protocol against non-indicted 1 and 2, each prosecutor's statement of the victim 1, 2, 3, 4 of the defendant's protocol of statement of the police as to the defendant Kim Dong-dong, a statement for the preparation of delivery 16 pages (16 pages), investigation report (235 pages), investigation report (236 pages), investigation report (2, 36 pages), investigation report (victim 2, 3 and 314 of the victim's statement, 167-1, 168, 170, 166, 260 pages of the investigation report, 16 pages of the evidence evidence of each of the defendant's 2, 160 pages of the investigation report (written evidence of this case).

(a) Each statement of victims;

First, we examine the credibility of statements made by victims 1, 2, 3, and 4, which are valuable evidence of the facts charged of this case.

(1) Circumstances to be considered in determining the credibility of the statements of the victims regarding the offender

In the criminal identification procedure based on the appearance, etc. of the suspect, one person who has been a witness alone or only one photograph of the suspect presented to the witness to confirm the suspect, shall be deemed to have low credibility unless there are additional circumstances, such as the suspect's oral statement in the criminal identification procedure, whether the suspect has been aware of the suspect or his/her photograph, or not, due to the limitation of human memory and the possibility that the suspect or his/her photograph may identify the suspect as a criminal under the specific circumstances, the suspect's identity shall be restricted, and the witness's statement in the criminal identification procedure shall be deemed to have been made only when there are other circumstances to suspect the suspect as the criminal (see Supreme Court Decision 200Do4946, Feb. 9, 2001). In order to enhance the credibility of the witness's statement in the criminal identification procedure, the witness's statement should be made after comparing the witness's appearance with the witness's statement or description after the suspect's appearance in advance, and the witness's identity shall be compared with the witness's 200th of evidence.

Furthermore, it cannot be assessed uniformly on the victim's face and verbal expression ability of the victim because of considerable personal differences. However, the victim can have a more accurate memory than a psychological stability person due to stress, interest, etc., and the victim has a high accuracy of his/her statement when the victim faces face with the offender, while the time is shorter than that of the offender, the accuracy of the victim's statement is considerably proportional to the accuracy of face and statement, such as low accuracy of statement when the victim faces face time, and when the victim uses a deadly weapon or dangerous object, the victim's sensence is concentrated on a deadly weapon, etc. than the offender's face. Furthermore, the victim's sensence of the offender is rare due to the passage of time, so it is more likely that the victim's identity will be made late, and the victim's first statement is more specific and accurate than that of the offender's statement after the victim's appearance is given to the offender. In addition, the victim's first statement after the victim's appearance is more specific and more difficult.

Ultimately, the determination of credibility of the victim's statement about the offender should be made by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances mentioned above and other objective circumstances to suspect the suspect as the offender.

(2) The reason why the victims became the defendant as the offender

First, according to each police officer's statement of the victims, each statement of the prosecutor's office's statement, each statement of the police officer's statement of the dispatch order, each statement of the police officer's statement of each investigation report (165 pages, 266 pages) and each investigation report, etc., the situation in which the victims classification the defendant as a criminal of the crime of this case is examined is as follows.

(A) The victims 1, 2, 3, and 4 are well aware of each other. On April 2, 2004, the police conducted an investigation into the facts of damage, etc., such as the facts charged in the instant case five times more than seven days, and on July 2, 2004, the police got out of the victim 3 to obtain a statement from the victim 1 on July 2, 2003 that the Seongbuk-gu 1 came to know through the Internet telephone room of the building adjacent to the National Bank, and 31§¯, 180cm in height, kis, kis, kis, kisksksksksksksksksksksksksksksksks, strawsksksksks, strings, and strings to the victim.

(B) On April 9, 2004, the police conducted an investigation into the dispatch decoration, which had been employed from the above phone number from July 2003, 203, and confirmed the fact that a male similar to the above increase line was a member of the telephone number of 016-268-9700 on January 9, 2004, and used the above telephone room, and then the defendant's personal information was identified through the above mobile phone number's personal information.

(C) After that, on April 11, 2004, the police issued the Defendant’s driver’s license to three victims, who were extracted by the police through the driver’s license inquiry, and the victim 3 stated that the person on the photograph was the offender of this case. On July 13, 2002, the police stated that the victim 3 and the victim 2 had the Defendant appear voluntarily to the police station, and that the victim 3 and the victim 2 are not the offender, and the police arrested the Defendant. On the other hand, on the 20th of the same month, the victim 3 and the victim 2 stated that the Defendant was the policeman on July 2002 on the ground that they stated the date and time of his death in the police station in the previous time of his mistake.

(D) On the other hand, on April 21, 2004, the police made the victim 1 face-to-face the defendant under investigation who is detained in the instant case, and the victim 1 viewed the defendant's age below 1, 2 years, but stated that the defendant is an offender clearly.

(E) On April 29, 2004, the police stated that the victim 4 was fluored by the victim 4 on April 29, 2004, and that the victim 4 was detained by the police station. The victim 4 stated that the victim 4 was the same as the offender except that the face on the photograph was little.

(3) Details of the victims' statements

(A) The statement made by the victim 1

① At the time of the victim’s appearance, the victim 1 stated at the police that the victim suffered from the damage that the offender was sexually sexually abused from the male level of not less than 180cm, that the offender was sexually abused at the time of the victim’s appearance, that the offender was sexually fluored, that he did not have a string, that he did not have a string, and that he did not have a string. However, the victim 3 made the victim’s statement at around May 6, 2002 at the fourth statement at the police time, that the victim was sexually disturbed from the victim’s statement that the victim was sexually abused at the time of the victim’s appearance, that the victim was sexually disturbed from the victim’s 180cm and that the victim was sexually abused at the time of the victim’s statement that the victim was sexually disturbed and that the victim was sexually abused at the time of the victim’s statement that the victim was sexually abused at the victim’s 1.

② In addition, the victim 1 stated in the police that he was aware that the victim 3 and the victim 4 talked with the same criminal in knife and forced sexual intercourse and forced him to receive money. However, the victim 4 stated in the prosecutor's office and this court that the victim 1 and the non-indicted 1 would be at the victim 1 and the non-indicted 1 after sexual assault, and that the victim 1 would be at the victim 1 and the non-indicted 1, the victim 1 would be at the victim 1 and the victim 1 would be at the victim 1 and the victim 1 would be at the victim 1 and the victim 1 would be at the victim 1 and the victim 1 would be at the victim 1 and the victim 1 would be at the victim 1's convenience store. The victim 1 was at the victim 1 and the victim 1 did not provide the knife with the victim 1's statement in this court. This part of the statement is inconsistent with the victim 4.

(B) Details of the statement made by the victim 2

① With respect to the date and time of his/her damage, the victim 2 made a statement as a policeman on July 2003, 2003, including the time when the second statement was made by the police, and reversed the statement as a policeman on July 2002, on the ground that the third statement made by the police, such as the date when the victim 3 reversed the statement on the date and time of damage, and the victim 2 took the same care as the victim 3, from the time when the third statement was made by the police, which was affixed the same as that of the victim. In addition, the victim 2 stated in this court that he/she was sexual assaulter than the victim 3, but the victim 3 stated that he/she was sexual assaulter than the victim 2, and that the victim 2's statement

② On the other hand, the victim 2 made a statement as to the string used by the defendant at this court as the wire line, and the victim 2 made a statement that he did not say that the other hand line was bound by the police after putting the other hand line seized by the police. However, the victim 2 made a statement that the other hand line was bound by the victim 2, but the victim 2 made a statement that the other hand line was bound by the seizure was not consistent with the statement or investigation report (166 pages of the investigation record) of the second police officer's second statement against the victim 2. Furthermore, unlike the victim 2's above statement at the prosecutor's office, Non-indicted 2 made a statement that the victim 2 suffered the damage and she saw the same line as the labbing of the bringer.

③ The victim 2 stated in this court that the criminal was panty panty in the color or the test color system. However, according to the witness abnormal lines and the statement of the effect of the spanty each, the defendant can be found to have suffered only the panty panty between the twit priority and the tpanty panty.

④ Furthermore, at the second time of the police statement, the victim 2 made the second time a statement with the victim's second time, and the victim 2 made the second time a telephone call to the beneficiary, and the victim 2 was sponsed with sponsed with sponsed with sphere and sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere with sphere.

(C) Statement by the victim 3

① As seen earlier, the victim 3 stated that he was a policeman at the time of the instant damage until July 2003, 2003, as seen earlier, and reversed the victim’s statement that he was damaged to a policeman on July 2002, 200, with the same reasons as the victim 2 from the time of the fourth statement of the police, which was affixed the same date and time as the date of the reversal of the date and time of the damage by the victim 2, unlike the victim 2’s statement, the victim stated that he was damaged first to the victim 2.

② With regard to the awareness of a criminal, the victim 3 testified that the criminal was using the typology in the prosecutor’s office. However, in this court, the victim reversed the statement that was used for the typology test.

③ In this Court, the victim 3 stated that the criminal was panty, and that the criminal was panty, and that the body was humping, and that the criminal was humping. However, according to each statement of the witness humping and the effect of the humping, the defendant can be found to have suffered only the panty of each tumke, instead of the humpanty, and according to the witness humping’s statement, the defendant’s body can be recognized to have more known than ordinary people.

④ Furthermore, at the time of the first oral statement by the police, the victim 3 stated that he was “I am out of the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the crypted by the cry

⑤ In addition, the victim 3 stated in the investigative agency and this court that the defendant got knife to the beneficiary knife using the call after the escape. However, Non-Indicted 1 stated in the prosecutor's office that the victim 3 got knife to the knife because the victim 3 got knife to the "sal knife", the victim 3 got knife from the victim 3. The victim 3's statement about this part is inconsistent with Non-Indicted 1's statement.

(D) Details of the statement made by the victim 4

① After the lapse of one year after the second crime was committed, the victim 4 made a statement from the police station to the prosecution that the defendant was the same person as the offender. However, since the first crime was committed and the six months elapsed, the victim 4 was first committed and the victim was seen as the same person, the victim 1 was not aware of the offender even though he was the third person at the time of the second crime, and the victim was unable to be aware of the identity of the offender, even though he was unable to memory all of the face of the perpetrator, and the victim stated that the victim was satisfy with other relatives in satam, and that the victim 4 was able to identify the face of the victim at the time of the second crime.

② The victim 4 stated in this Court that at the time when the second offender was appointed and the second offender was not aware of the fact at the time when the victim suffered the second damage, but this part of the victim’s statement was contrary to the statement in this Court by the defendant - 8 observer that his own visual ability is impossible to lead a normal life without being aware of the victim’s identity.

③ Furthermore, at the police at the time of the first damage, the victim 4 stated that at the time of the first damage, the defendant left the clothes after melting the string of the string of the knish with his hand, but it is questionable that it is not easy for the victim 4 to turn on the flring of the knife while she was bound by hand.

④ In addition, the victim 4 stated in the investigative agency and this court that, after the first commission of the first crime against himself, the offender left the phone line of the telephone terminal connected to the Rameto to the Rame. However, the witness was confirmed that the Rametour did not cut the phone line of the above Rameto for the last 203 years.

(4) The credibility of the statements by the victims

(A) In light of the circumstances leading up to which the victims selected the Defendant as the offender, it is unreasonable to readily conclude the Defendant as the offender of the instant crime on the sole basis of the victim’s statement alone, even though the victims did not properly observe the procedure to enhance credibility in the criminal identification process, and the police did not have any particular reason to suspect the Defendant as the offender and requested the confirmation of the Defendant by deeming the Defendant as the suspect as having been similar to the Defendant, and the victims reported the Defendant and subsequently repeated the same statement.

(B) Furthermore, the victims may not be readily determined that there was no possibility for the victims to be aware of their identity because they met with the offender in a considerable interest or psychological unstable situation at the time of the crime of this case, and since they have a knife with a knife, they cannot be ruled out at all. ② The victim's appearance, etc., pointing out by the victims cannot be readily determined as the victim's unique appearance in light of the empirical rule, and there seems to exist many persons with a similar appearance in light of the empirical rule, ③ the victims can not be forgotten since one year from the date of the damage and two years from the date of the damage, and the victim's memory itself cannot be said to have been interfered with the victim's face, and ④ one of the victims is the victim's photograph first, and the victim's name was the victim's offender under investigation police officer's knife with the victim's photograph, the victim's remaining victim's appearance and credibility cannot be reversed as well as the victim's objective statement or credibility.

(b) Other statements by witnesses, seized articles;

(1) Details of the statement of an alert

In light of the contents of the testimony made by the Defendant on July 2003, the Defendant was working on the Internet telephone room, for the long time, and the Defendant was employed as a customer on the Internet telephone room from January 9, 2004, and used the above phone room by joining the Internet telephone room from January 9, 2004, and the Defendant’s appearance was similar to the victim’s appearance. ① The instant crime was committed mainly before the dispatch decoration was made from the above phone, ② the person who was similar to the offender’s appearance was made from the police station to several persons, from among the customers of the above phone, the Defendant did not have sufficient evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant was the offender of this case.

(2) The statement of Kim Dong-dong

The contents of the above Internet telephone, Kim Dong-dong, the main owner of the Internet telephone bank, did not directly regard the defendant at the time of the crime of this case, but it was revealed that the defendant frequently entered the Internet telephone room. Since the defendant's appearance is similar to that of the offender's appearance, the above statement is not sufficient evidence to recognize the fact that the defendant is the offender of this case.

(3) Each statement made by Nonindicted 1 and 2

The respective statements made by Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 2 are insufficient to support the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime, inasmuch as the victims did not directly have observed the offender at the time of the commission of the crime, but they were committed by the victims.

(4) Each existing evidence seized is found

① According to the fact that a man is ordinarily employed by men, ② Nos. 1 and 2 of yellow and other lines (Evidence Nos. 2), the victim 2 stated that the defendant himself was bound by yellow or other yellow lines seized by the police, ③ the above uniforms were manufactured on April 2003 after the crime of this case, according to the witness’s statement, and the above uniforms were not in the shape of the defendant’s 6th anniversary of this case’s white marction (Evidence No. 8), and the above 3th anniversary of this case’s white marction (Evidence No. 9), the defendant was not in the shape of the defendant’s marction and 4th of this case’s white marction (Evidence No. 1) and the above marction No. 9 of this case’s marction and 1 of this case’s marctionary marction and 1 of this case’s marctionary marction 2007 of this case’s.

C. Sub-committee

The burden of proof for the facts constituting an offense prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it is inevitable to determine the defendant's interest (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do7095, Apr. 16, 2004, etc.).

In this case, even though there is no motive for four victims, not one person, to make a false statement, it is clear and consistently concluding the defendant as a criminal offender, and there is a difference between the defendant's appearance and the fact that the defendant actually used the Internet telephone call as stated in the facts charged, etc., and there are circumstances to suspect the defendant as the criminal offender of the crime of this case. However, as seen earlier, the victim's statement, which is a direct evidence of the facts charged of this case, lacks credibility or lack of probative value, the remaining evidence alone consistent with the facts charged is insufficient to acknowledge the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to prove it. Thus, it is difficult to view that there is evidence to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

4. Conclusion

Thus, the facts charged of this case can be found not guilty in accordance with the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act because there is no proof of crime.

Judges Lee Hyun-soo (Presiding Judge)