The case holding that it is impossible for the victim to believe that he/she has made a statement on the arrival of the offender after observing the appearance of the person designated as the offender.

If we look at the appearance of a person without any month, 50 cent or more shall be approaching the situation, and if the offender wants to become the victim by cutting the trees in front and rear descendants, it is difficult to believe that there is a case where the victim has observed the appearance of a person designated as the offender once, and the statement on the appearance of the victim has occurred.

Article 301 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Prosecutor and Defendant

Daegu District Court of First Instance (68 High Court Decision 3159)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent.

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is that the court below recognized the whole facts charged and sentenced to punishment in 2 years and six months by reducing the statutory penalty, and it is unfair that the defendant denies the crime committed in the time-to-day, and thus, the sentencing is too unreasonable. The gist of the defendant's appeal is that the defendant misleads the court below that he was convicted of the defendant despite the fact that the defendant did not commit this case. Thus, the court below will first consider the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

First of all, the facts charged against the defendant are as follows: the defendant tried to rape the victim non-indicted 1 (year 24) who was walking along a dry field near the front side of Song-dong, Song-dong, Song-dong, Song-dong on March 28, 1968, by threatening him to the effect that he is provoking and is provoking of the female with two descendants in the front and rear, etc. of the women, and by threatening him to resist, the defendant forced him to resist, and let him flick the brym and math of the bru and math of the 20 meters away from that place, leading him to a dry field 20 meters away from that place, leading him to the right side of the female, she tried to rape with the right side of the female, but the victim of the flurg and the flurg in the middle of the flurg and the flurg in the middle of the burg.

In regard to this, the defendant denies the criminal facts that the police did not know at the time of the statement of facts charged and there is no victim. However, among the evidence enumerated by the court below, the testimony of Non-Indicted 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the witness of the court below and the protocol of examination of evidence by the court below cannot be the only evidence to support the facts charged, but only the statement of Non-Indicted 1 (victim 1) of the witness of the court below is the only evidence for the facts charged.

However, according to the witness's statement (the police officer of the same witness, the court below's statement at the prosecutor's office and each statement at the court below can be seen to the same effect as the witness's statement at the same time. From the next day, considering the witness's statement, there are questions as follows. First, according to the witness's statement, the witness's appearance is 25 years old and knife red, so the witness's appearance is flick, and the face shape is common, so the witness's face, age level, and color is clearly identical to that at the time of the crime, the witness's statement at the court below and the court below can be seen to have been made to the same effect as the witness's statement at the time of the crime, and if the witness's testimony at the time of the crime was made to the witness's appearance, it is possible to see that the witness's appearance was flick, and that it was possible to flick up to the witness's appearance at the time of the crime.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty on the case where the crime of this case was not sufficient evidence to acknowledge that the defendant is the defendant is the defendant can be reversed and the judgment of the court below is to be ruled again in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Since there is no evidence as to the facts charged in this case, it shall be sentenced not guilty by Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and therefore the prosecutor's appeal shall be dismissed as it has no reason to do so.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Tae-tae (Presiding Judge)