beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors and misapprehension of the legal principle) was not returned to the operating location of the foregoing morality (hereinafter “accomforion”) as stated in the facts constituting an offense in the judgment below.
Therefore, the defendant could not have predicted fire occurrence and could not avoid it.
The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to mistake of facts and negligence.
2. Determination
(a)in a criminal trial, the formation of a conviction must not necessarily be formed by direct evidence, but may be based on indirect evidence, and indirect evidence should not be individually or separately assessed, and should be evaluated in a comprehensive manner with respect to each other in full and in a consistent and inconsistent manner;
In addition, the probative value of evidence is left to the discretion of a judge, but such judgment must be consistent with logical and empirical rules, and the degree of the formation of a conviction to be found guilty in a criminal trial should be free to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. However, it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence which is recognized as having probative value is not allowed beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. The expression “reasonable doubt” refers to a reasonable doubt as to the probability of a fact that is inconsistent with the facts that is not compatible with the facts that are alleged in accordance with logical and empirical rules, rather than all questions and correspondences, and it refers to a reasonable doubt as to the probability of a fact that is not compatible with the facts that are alleged in accordance with the logical and empirical rules. As such, a suspicion based on conceptual or abstract possibility should not be included in a rational doubt.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14262 Decided February 24, 2011). B.
The court below is legitimate.