The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On July 3, 2015, around 14:30 on July 3, 2015, the Defendant assaulted the Victim D (V, 49 years of age) in the playground located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on the ground that the Victim D (V, and vain) is vain, thereby shakinging the Victim’s head by balking the Victim’s head, and continuing to drive the Victim into E, who is a dangerous thing for the Victim who was seated.

2. In order to admit evidence of the protocol under Article 312 or the statement, etc. under Article 313 after the protocol under Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act pursuant to Article 314 of the said Act, it shall be the time when a person who needs to make a statement at a preparatory hearing or a public trial is unable to make a statement due to death, illness, residence in a foreign country, unknown whereabouts, or any other similar cause, and it shall be time when it is proved that the statement or preparation has been made under particularly reliable circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do9615, Sept. 10, 2015). Furthermore, in order to recognize admissibility of evidence pursuant to Article 314 of the said Criminal Procedure Act, there is no apparent procedural error in the preparation process of the statement or protocol, or there is no specific circumstance to suspect the voluntariness of the statement, etc., beyond the cross-examination, even if it does not go beyond the cross-examination and even if it sufficiently establishes evidence evidence that may sufficiently guarantee the credibility and outside evidence.

The degree of assessment ought to be reached (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do6035, Aug. 26, 2014). “Certification as to whether it was done under particularly reliable circumstances” should be sufficient to the extent that it is probable to do so, and should be out of reasonable doubt (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do725, Apr. 30, 2014). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, it is so in light of the foregoing.