No defendant may be examined by means of a preservation of evidence.

No defendant may be examined by means of a preservation of evidence.

Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Cheongju District Court Decision 72No711 delivered on August 29, 1972, Cheongju District Court Decision 72No711 delivered on August 29, 1972

The appeal is dismissed.

The ninety days of detention after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

The defendant's defense counsel's letter of confinement, interference, and his own grounds of appeal are examined.

The argument that simple mistake of facts or sentencing is excessive in the paper is not a legitimate ground for appeal against the defendant. According to the provisions of Article 184 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the prosecutor, the defendant, the suspect, or the defense counsel may request the judge to seize, search, inspect, examine the witness, or give expert opinion even before the first trial date if there are circumstances where it is difficult to use the evidence unless it is preserved in advance. Thus, it cannot be requested by the method of preservation of evidence. The adoption of the defendant's statement consistent with the facts in the judgment of the first instance court maintained by the court below as evidence is erroneous in the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence admitted as evidence, but it is possible to find the facts of this case based on various evidences of the first instance court. Thus, the argument on this point is without merit, and it is sufficient to acknowledge the facts of this case against the defendant's testimony at the first instance court's first instance court's prior trial date, and it is impossible to find the defendant's testimony and the defense counsel's testimony at the first instance trial court's first instance court's decision that it did not have any error in the first instance's opinion.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench, by applying Article 57 of the Criminal Act.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Park Jae-dong (Presiding Judge)