The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) is that the issue of this case is whether the conflict to the victim E by the employees of the C company in China would be caused by the defendant's teacher, and according to the contents recorded in telephone conversations with the F of the C company, the defendant clearly stated that "the defendant would not pay the victim's expenses, so the defendant would not have sent the vehicle, and would not pay the victim's expenses," but the court below rejected it on the ground that the F did not have testified in the court, and judged the defendant not guilty of the facts charged, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misconception of facts against the rules of evidence.

2. Determination

A. If an ex officio decision-making tape on the admissibility of a CD in which the recording file is stored is verified, and the contents of the conversations or statement recorded in the tape are recorded in a tape and attached as part of the verification protocol, evidence constituting evidence is still deemed to be the content of the conversations or statement recorded in the tape. As such, the content of the recording or video recording or the content of the verification protocol on the tape is still the content of the recording or video recording. Thus, insofar as the Defendant did not agree that the tape can be admitted as evidence because it does not actually differ from the documents in which the statement is recorded in place of the statement at a preparatory hearing or during a public trial, it is neither prescribed in Articles 311 through 315 of the Criminal Procedure Act nor can it be admitted as evidence of guilt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do7461, Sept. 13, 2012); electronic media, such as the recording file, etc., in light of its nature, without the signature or seal of the person who made the recording;