The case holding that the defendant is liable for murder since it cannot be inferred that the loss of life of the person killed was caused by a deadly weapon used by the defendant.

The case holding that the defendant is liable for murder since it cannot be inferred that the loss of life of the person killed was caused by a deadly weapon used by the defendant.

Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Lee Sung-soo, Kim Jong-sung

Gwangju High Court Decision 85No187 delivered on June 21, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

One hundred days of detention days after an appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

1. We examine the defendant and his defense counsel's grounds of appeal.

(1) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, on February 3, 1983, the court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant was killed by causing the death of the victim at around the time of the investigation by the police and the prosecutor's office as well as the first instance court at the time of the investigation by the defendant, in collaboration with the non-indicted 1, 7, and 1, the accomplice, and the non-indicted 1, 3, and the defendant were possessed by the victim 1 and the non-indicted 1 and 3, each time, and the left chest and the chest of the above victim 1, each time, and let the victim 1 find out the fact that he was killed. According to the records, the defendant led the defendant to the confession of the above victim 1's chest and the first instance court at the time of the investigation by the police and the prosecutor's office, and supported the prosecutor's investigation records on the suspect 2, 1, and 3, the suspect examination protocol as to the non-indicted 5, each of the above defendant's confession.

(2) According to the opinion of the doctor on the examination of the body of the above victim, it is obvious that the body of the above victim's death is the body with a deadly weapon of the fluor in both days, and since the body of the fluor is the body by the fluor's deadly weapon, the body of the fluor's body of the fluor. Therefore, although it is clear that the defendant is not the body of the fluor's body of the fluor's body of the fluor's body of the fluor's body of the defendant, the court below found the defendant guilty on the basis of the statement of

Therefore, according to the health stand and the record, the consent of the victim 1's doctor who examined the body of the body of the defendant is recognized as stating that, as alleged in the above argument in the court of the defendant's case such as murder at 83 High Court Decision 83 High Court Decision 76 High Court Decision 83 High Court Decision 83 High Court Decision 76 High Court Decision 83 High High Court Decision 80 Mahap100 High Court Decision on the co-offenders in the case of this case, the chest father's co-insor's injury, etc., which was a fatal injury, is a wound by a

However, upon examining the interrogation protocol on Nonindicted 4, in the course of handling the affairs by the judicial police officer employed by the court below, the defendant prepared the victim's first-day and the first-day and the second-day and the first-aid and the first-aid and the second-aid and the second-aid and the third-party 6 did not prepare any other deadly weapons at the time of the collision. The defendant's excessive use of the pipe and the second-aid and the second-aid and the second-aid and the second-aid and the third-party 6 stated that the excessive use of the pipe was about 20 centimeters, and they were well knife, and they supported the contents of the defendant's statements. The statements on the types of the above deadly weapons and the contents carried by the police and the prosecutor's office as above do not seem to have been distorted and distorted in particular only to the disadvantage of the defendant. Accordingly, the victim's chest and the second-aid and third-party 6 cannot be deemed to have occurred due to any excessive possession of the defendant and the first-aid.

However, when considering the testimony from the court of first instance on the above accomplice of the defendant's case as to the above accomplice, the depth from the defendant's wife on the chest side to the blood relative wife is at least 7 centimeters, and the width of the part 7 centimeters from the end of the improvement which the non-indicted 1 possessed is considerably greater than the width of the upper body (in case of the above defendant's case No. 129, the width of the upper body is 1.6 centimeters). Thus, the chest side's chest side cannot be considered to be the upper body under the above improvement. In light of this, it is inevitable to see that the chest side of the above victim's chest side is caused by excessive use by the defendant.

However, if the excessive amount used by the defendant, as alleged by the defendant, is in conflict with the opinion of the above highest person's consent that the excessive amount used by the defendant is a wound by a deadly weapon of the fluor. However, there is no evidence to recognize the excessive amount used by the defendant in the record as a fluor, as alleged by the defendant, and if the defendant testified in the court of the first instance on the above fluor of the defendant's case concerning the above fluor, the fluor made a statement to the effect that the end portion of the fluor used by the non-indicted 1 (see, e.g., the 126th photograph of the defendant's case record) may not be seen as being well fluorous and well fluorous, even if it is excessive, if the body is light and exceptional, it can be known that the victim's opinion that the victim's fluoral body is a serious obstacle to the defendant's body's fluorial body cannot be acknowledged as a criminal offense.

3. In addition, the judgment of the court below which recognized the facts charged of murder against the defendant cannot be found to be incomplete, or there is no error of violation of the rules of evidence or any omission of reasoning, and the appeal shall be dismissed, and one hundred days of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice) (Presiding Justice) No. 1 and Lee Jong-young (Presiding Justice) are overseas business tripss, whose name and seal can not be affixed.