beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
In full view of the evidence that correspond to the facts charged in this case, the court below found the defendant guilty on the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death or Injury resulting from Dangerous Driving), and found him guilty on the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Death or Injury), although the defendant had difficulty in driving normally due to influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime
Sentencing: The sentence of the lower court (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment) is too uncomfortable and unfair.
Judgment
In a criminal trial on the determination of facts concerning the assertion of mistake, the recognition of facts should be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that it would lead to such conviction, even if the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 201). In addition, in light of the fact that the appellate court is in the nature as a post-trial even after its appearance, and the spirit of substantial direct trial as prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Act, etc., it is insufficient for the first instance court to exclude reasonable doubt after undergoing the examination of evidence, such as examination of witness.
In a case where a not-guilty verdict is rendered on the facts charged, if it does not reach the extent that it can sufficiently resolve the reasonable doubt raised by the first instance trial even if the probability or doubt about some opposing facts may be raised as a result of the appellate trial’s examination, there is an error of mistake in the determination of facts in the first instance judgment, which lacks proof of crime solely
We conclude that the facts charged are guilty.