When Amendments to Bill of Indictment are possible;

The modification of the indictment pursuant to Article 298(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be permitted to the extent that it does not harm the identity of the facts charged, unless there are special circumstances, such as the occurrence of the cause for modification after the closing of argument, etc., and it does not necessarily require the court to allow the modification of the indictment by resumption of the trial on the ground that the prosecutor applied for the modification of the indictment after the closing of the trial lawfully after the closing of the trial.

Article 298(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 84Do564,84Do90 Decided May 15, 1984 (Gong1984, 1060) 86Do1691 Decided October 14, 1986 (Gong1986, 3075)

Defendant

Prosecutor

Daegu District Court Decision 93No2753 delivered on May 19, 1994

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

On the first ground for appeal

The modification of the indictment pursuant to Article 298(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be permitted to the extent that it does not harm the identity of the facts charged, unless there are special circumstances, such as the occurrence of the cause for the modification after the closing of argument, etc., and it does not necessarily require the court to allow the modification of the indictment by resumption of the trial on October 14, 1986 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 86Do1691, Oct. 14, 1986; 84Do564, 84Do90, May 15, 1984).

In this case, it is obvious that the prosecutor submitted an application for resumption of argument and an application for modification of indictment due to the reasons prior to the closing of argument after the closure of argument in the appellate trial without any special circumstances and the notice by the end of the judgement. Thus, it cannot be said that the court below erred by violating Article 298 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the court below did not permit the prosecutor's application for modification of indictment after resumption of the trial

On the second ground for appeal

The court below rejected the evidence that corresponds to the facts charged in this case and judged that there is no evidence to prove the crime and acquitted the defendant. If the court below reviewed the relevant evidence in comparison with the records, it shall be justified and it shall not be deemed that there is an error of law that misleads the facts in violation of the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, and it shall not be deemed that there is an error of law that misleads the selection of evidence and the recognition of facts belonging to the exclusive authority

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

Justices Lee Yong-hun (Presiding Justice)