Whether or not a copy of the document to be subject to consent under Article 318(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is included

Documents or articles on which the defendant agrees to be admitted as evidence under Article 318(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be admitted as evidence when it is recognized as genuine, and the documents to be the object of consent here shall include not only the original but also a copy thereof.

Article 318(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Jeon Soo-soo, Man-soo

Seoul High Court Decision 86No111 Decided April 3, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

70 days under detention after an appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

The defendant and his defense counsel's grounds of appeal are examined together.

1. (1) According to Article 318(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, documents or articles on which the defendant consented that the defendant may be admitted as evidence may be admitted as evidence when it is recognized as genuine, and the documents subject to the consent here shall include not only the original copy but also the copy thereof. According to the records, the defendant's defense counsel at the fourth trial of the first instance court at the trial of the first instance court, it is obvious that the defendant recognized the existence of the original copy and consented to the copy of the certificate of death as to the victim Kim Dong-dong exchange bound in Chapter 104 of the investigation records. In comparison with related evidence, if the contents are examined, it can be recognized as genuine. Thus, the measures taken by the court below as evidence of guilt adopted as evidence of guilt cannot be said to be adopted as evidence of conviction such as legitimate and theory, and the case of a party member who seeks to answer the question is not about whether the copy of documents can be subject to the consent of evidence as referred to in Article 318(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, but also about the use of a document forgery cannot be the object of a document forgery.

(2) Among the four parts suffered by the victim, three parts, including the two parts, which were killed in the name of the victim, are all carried out from the left side of the victim and carried out to the right side. It is pointed out that only one part is carried out from the victim's right side and carried out to the right side. However, it is difficult to conclude that the defendant's testimony was contradictory to the victim's family's credibility or witness's testimony was not contradictory to the defendant's family's testimony in the situation where the defendant's testimony was not carried out to the right side in the victim's right side, and the defendant's testimony was not carried out to the right side at the victim's right side.

(3) In light of the records, the court below's determination that the defendant was guilty of murdering the victim due to macroscopic evidence, including evidence, is legitimate, and it cannot be deemed that there were unlawful grounds such as misconception of facts due to the violation of the rules of evidence or lack of reasoning.

2. The court below rejected the defendant's assertion that the crime of this case was committed in the state of mental disorder. However, it cannot be deemed that there was an error of law in finding that the defendant, at the time of the crime, committed only the state in which the ability to discern things and make decisions was weak due to excessive drinking, and even considering the circumstances that may serve as the various form of conditions cited by the theory of lawsuit, it is difficult to readily conclude that the sentencing of the defendant

3. Ultimately, the appeal is dismissed, and a part of the detention days after the appeal is included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee B-soo (Presiding Justice)