A person who has the right to file a complaint, after being examined by an investigative agency as a witness or a victim, expresses his intention to request the punishment of the offender, and is recorded in the above protocol, and is in the manner of complaint under

In the case of an oral complaint, a protocol shall be prepared, and even if the protocol is not an independent protocol, if the investigation agency examines a person who has filed a complaint as a witness or a victim, it shall be deemed that the criminal has expressed his/her intent to punish him/her in the statement and that the statement has been entered in the protocol. (The victims of the crime of adultery have expressed their intent to request the punishment in the course of handling affairs with the judicial police officer, and the declaration of intention has been entered in the protocol)

Article 237 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Daejeon High Court Decision 65No343 decided Nov. 23, 1965

The appeal is dismissed.

60 days under detention after an appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

We examine each of the grounds of appeal by the defendant and defense counsel

Examining the timely evidence of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court below based on the records, the court below does not recognize the criminal facts of this case, and even if the court below did not accept a witness's application, it cannot be deemed unlawful even if it did not employ the witness's application, and the complaint must be filed by the prosecutor or judicial police officer in writing or oral form, and if there is an oral complaint, the protocol must be prepared. If an investigative agency examines the complainant as a witness or a victim, even though not by the independent protocol, if the investigative agency requested the punishment of the offender in the statement and entered the statement in the protocol, it shall be interpreted that the requirement for the complaint was satisfied. Therefore, in this case, unless it is evident that the victim of the crime of second instance made a statement to a judicial police officer about his affairs, and the expression of intent was written in the above protocol, it is not reasonable to conclude that there was no legitimate complaint and that there was no legitimate ground for appeal as to the defendant's case for which seven years have passed since there was no legitimate grounds for appeal.

Therefore, the grounds for final appeal of this case cannot be any one or more.

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

The judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) of the Red Round (Presiding Judge)