The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and the misapprehension of legal principles) (the court below) confirmed the situation in which the victim was forced to leave the Republic of Korea and thus could not attend the court, and should have the victim granted admissibility to the victim's written petition, written statement, etc. under Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The court below rejected the admissibility of the victim's written petition, written statement, etc. for more than eight months, and found the victim not guilty of the facts charged in this case, based on the fact that the statement or written statement was not recognized under particularly reliable circumstances. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

Judgment

"When the statement or preparation is made under particularly reliable circumstances" under Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act refers to cases where there is little room for false entry in the preparation of the content of the statement or the protocol or the document, and specific and external circumstances exist to guarantee the credibility or voluntariness of the content of the statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do9561, Apr. 14, 2006). Furthermore, in cases where Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act is unknown where the whereabouts of a witness is unknown, it is recognized as admissibility of the statement or the written statement made by the witness. It is limited to cases where the Criminal Procedure Act recognizes admissibility of the evidence of the written evidence, such as the statement of witness, etc., provided that the Criminal Procedure Act recognizes exceptions to the basic principles, such as direct psychological principle, so that the admissibility of evidence can be granted without any opportunity to cross-examine the original person or his/her defense counsel, thereby allowing him/her to be admitted without any opportunity to cross-examine the witness.