beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. On February 6, 2013, at around 23:00, the Defendant: (a) intruded to the inner room through an open entrance in the house located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon; and (b) cut off KRW 5 million in cash owned by D from the dominter; and (c) stolen it.
2. Determination
A. The key issue is consistently asserting that the Defendant, since the investigative agency, had consistently provided meals with DE, etc. on February 6, 2013 to the court, he received KRW 600,000 from E at the home of D and did not go to the house of D on the date specified in the facts charged.
We look at the credibility of the DE's investigative agencies and legal statements, which are evidence that seem to correspond to the facts charged.
B. The contents of the statements made by the investigative agency and the DE’s statement are similar to a considerable portion. The part directly related to the facts charged is ① the statement made by D that the Defendant entered his office at the time indicated in the facts charged, ② the statement to the effect that he saw the Defendant’s entry into his office on February 6, 2013, ② the Defendant E took D after his own meals, and immediately went into his office without entering the D’s office, ② the statement to the effect that he did not contact between E and the Defendant after February 7, 2013.
1) ① This part of the statement made by D is difficult to believe in light of the following circumstances. (A) D knew of the fact of damage around the new wall on February 7, 2013, and immediately returned to E’s house, and immediately reported to the police on February 8, 2013, the following day.
D The reason why D did not immediately report in the court was “E believed to believe that E had been able to take a defendant on the ground that it did not immediately report,” but it is inconsistent with the fact that D made a report on the following day when D knew that “D had been able to make a direct report (D stated that it was known to him/her at the court that he/she was aware of it),” and that “D believed during licking.”
B. D on February 8, 2013, when the first report was filed by the police, the defendant on February 6, 2013.