The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Criminal facts in a criminal trial should be admitted as a strict evidence that has the probative value to the extent that the judge has no reasonable doubt. As such, in a case where the prosecutor fails to prove to the extent that he/she has a sufficient conviction, there are circumstances, such as in which the defendant's assertion or defense is contradictory or uncomfortable, and there are suspicions of guilt, even if the defendant's assertion or defense

Even if a judge’s conviction is not necessarily required to be formed by direct evidence, but is formed by indirect evidence so long as it does not violate the empirical and logical rules, the recognition of indirect facts constituting the premise of major facts is required to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. In such a case, there is no contradiction and conflict between them, and there is no indirect fact, and it should be supported by logical and empirical rules and scientific rules (see Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do3698, Sept. 26, 2003; 2010Do10895, Dec. 9, 2010). Therefore, it is difficult to view that there is sufficient evidence that there is sufficient possibility that the defendant could have been convicted of criminal facts, such as the motive of the crime, method of selecting the crime, process of the crime, and the criminal defendant’s attitude before and after the crime.

The presumption of innocence is based on the constitutional principle, and in a case where there is direct evidence to reverse such presumption, the amount of penalty should be the degree (see Supreme Court Decision 2017Do1549, May 30, 2017).2.