Since the court did not urge the prosecutor to change the indictment, it cannot be illegal and the burden of proof for granting the admissibility of documentary evidence is that the prosecutor who submitted documentary evidence.

The court's failure to urge the prosecutor to amend the bill of amendment cannot be illegal and the burden of proof to grant the admissibility of documentary evidence is the prosecutor who submitted the documentary evidence.

Article 294 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Article 298 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Busan District Court Decision 70No1600 delivered on July 24, 1970

The appeal is dismissed.

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, considering the testimony of the witness of the first instance court and the statement made by the witness of the non-indicted 1 and the non-indicted 2 and the investigative agency of the same person, there is no illegality in violation of the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence in maintaining the judgment of the first instance that acquitted the defendant on the ground that the victim cannot be recognized as being injured as being the same as the facts charged in this case, and it cannot be said that the court did not urge the prosecutor to change the indictment. In this case, there is no evidence that the court did not give an opportunity to change the indictment, and the burden of proof for granting the admissibility of documentary evidence should be found to be the prosecutor who submitted documentary evidence. Thus, in this case for which the court of the first instance rendered a verdict of not guilty on the grounds that the documentary evidence is inadmissible as a result of the trial in the court of first instance, unless there is any assertion or presentation of supporting evidence, it cannot be said that the court of the second instance did not urge the prosecutor to present evidence.

The appeal by the prosecutor of this case to the effect that the court below has committed an unlawful act that does not recognize the facts of conviction against the rules of evidence or committed an unlawful act that does not exhaust all necessary deliberations, is without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed by the assent of all participating judges. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Han-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court