In the case of self-denunciation to investigation agencies after the commission of crime, the number of self-denunciation under Article 52 of the Criminal Act

Even after whom the criminal facts and the criminal are discovered, if the criminal voluntarily reports the criminal facts to the investigation agency, it shall be regarded as the number of the criminals.

Article 52 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Seoul High Court of the first instance, Seoul High Court of the second instance.

The original judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

2. Ground of appeal No. 1

In light of the fact that the defendant, who had escaped after the crime of this case, received the order issued by the investigative agency, voluntarily withdrawn from the police station guidance of the March Police Station around 22, 1964, which is the next day after the crime of this case, at around 30:0:00:0,000, the day following the crime of this case, can be recognized, the original judgment cannot be viewed as a self-denunciation under the Criminal Act. However, unlike the current Criminal Act, the current Criminal Act does not restrict the "defluence" as to self-denunciation, and thus, even if the criminal was discovered after whom whom the person was the criminal, the criminal

Nevertheless, there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the self-denunciation that the original judgment was judged in the same manner as the above opinion, and this affected the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the remaining grounds for appeal are with merit. Therefore, the original judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court, which is the original judgment, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Supreme Court Judge Madung (Presiding Judge) Kim Gung-bun and Madlebro