logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.06.27 2018노1436
상해
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding and the misapprehension of the legal principle) the police protocol prepared by the defendant is the content of the defendant, and its admissibility is not admissible, so it cannot be used as evidence in the case of Co-defendant A

Nevertheless, the court below adopted the case in A as evidence and affected the defendant's case.

The protocol of interrogation prepared by the police in relation to A and D was present at the court and did not state that the authenticity or the contents of the statement are consistent. The defendant and the defense counsel did not have an opportunity to cross-examine.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by adopting it as evidence in violation of Article 312(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The defendant's act constitutes self-defense, since he/she suffered bodily harm by assaulting several times against A and D.

Judgment

The first instance trial Co-Defendant A and the Defendant are in the relationship of co-defendant A, not co-defendant A, who is not co-defendant A, and the Defendant consented to the interrogation protocol (Evidence No. 9) of the Defendant as evidence. The police interrogation protocol of the Defendant against the Defendant can be acknowledged as genuine in light of the process of preparation and the form of protocol. Thus, the interrogation protocol of the police preparation of the Defendant in the case A is admissible in accordance with Article 318(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

In addition, even according to the record, there is no evidence to view that the case influenced the defendant's case.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion on the different premise is without merit.

Article 318(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act to determine whether each police officer's interrogation protocol about A and D is prepared shall be admitted as evidence when it is deemed that the documents or articles on which the prosecutor and the defendant agree to be admitted as evidence are genuine.

arrow