logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1986. 8. 8.자 86모31 결정
[재심청구기각결정에대한재항고][공1986,1416]
Main Issues

The meaning of "when clear evidence is newly discovered" under Article 420 subparagraph 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Summary of Judgment

The term "when clear evidence is newly discovered" as provided in subparagraph 5 of Article 420 of the Criminal Procedure Act means the time when evidence which was not discovered in, or could not be submitted even if it was discovered in, the litigation procedures in the finalized original judgment, and where it becomes possible to discover or submit objective advantages compared to those of other evidence in the value of evidence.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 420 subparagraph 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Order 85Mo36 Dated March 13, 1986

Re-appellant

Re-appellant

The order of the court below

Daegu High Court Order 85Hun-Ga1 dated July 14, 1986

Text

The reappeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of reappeal are examined.

"When clear evidence is newly discovered" as provided for in Article 420 subparagraph 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act refers to the time when evidence which was not discovered in, or could not be submitted even after it was discovered in, the litigation procedures in the finalized original judgment, and where it was found or can be submitted that objective advantages are acknowledged compared to those of other evidence in the value of evidence. In the same purport, the court below's dismissal of the petition for retrial of this case is just because the reason for the petition for retrial is not only the presentation of new evidence, but also the fact-finding or application of the original judgment in its own position, and it does not constitute grounds for retrial of this case on the ground that it does not constitute grounds for retrial of this case, and there are no errors

We cannot accept this issue.

Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)

arrow