(영문) 대구고등법원 2016.5.19. 선고 2016노4 판결

The Defendant is a physician in the air conditioners in the community hall, and there is no fact that there is no mixture of air conditioners, and there is no fact that the victims are mixed with air conditioners. The evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone cannot be viewed as having been proven without reasonable doubt, and the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty is erroneous in matters of mistake of facts.

2. Determination

A. Summary of the judgment of the court below

In the judgment of the court below, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, whether the defendant's name was and whether it was the direct damage to the victims in the former and the victim's previous car, the victims' genes could be excluded from the defendant's assertion as to the detection of the crimes in the latter's name without reasonable doubt, and the defendant's assertion as to the detection of the crimes in the latter's residence was discovered through the parallel of gamblings where the mail was detected in the defendant's residence, and there was a death closed at the end of the crime in this case's crime scene, and the fact that the mail was detected in the latter, and the defendant's assertion as to the detection of the mail, relief of the victims, and request for rescue do not coincide with the objective situation, the court below determined that the defendant attempted to kill or kill the victims by mixing it with the death.

B. Summary of the judgment of the court and the order of detailed judgment

1) Relevant legal principles

In a criminal trial, the conviction shall be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to lead a judge to a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. If there is no evidence to form such a conviction, even if there is doubt that the defendant is guilty, it shall be determined as the benefit of the defendant. However, such conviction does not necessarily have to be formed by direct evidence, but is formed by indirect evidence unless it violates empirical and logical rules. Even if indirect evidence does not have full probative value as to the facts charged individually, if it is deemed that there is a comprehensive probative value that is not independent if comprehensive examination of all evidence is conducted under mutual relation, even if indirect evidence does not have full probative value as to the facts charged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do4392, Nov. 27, 201).

2) Summary of the judgment of the trial court

In light of the above circumstances as stated by the court below, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, the facts charged in this case were proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Thus, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the defendant and his defense counsel. Accordingly, the defendant and the defense counsel's assertion is not accepted.

① The Defendant, with his usual speculation, had a dispute or conflict between the victims, especially with the victims M., and had been expressed with the usual suppression and reached the crime of this case.

In this situation, even if it is difficult to understand it as the motive for murder from the perspective of ordinary people, it is sufficient for the defendant to be the motive for murder from the standpoint of ordinary people, and the metro-de was a means of crime suitable for elderly defendants.

② From 19:00 on July 13, 2015 to 14:00 on July 14, 2015 (hereinafter “the day immediately before the commission of the crime”), the Defendant was able to commit the crime without any difficulty, considering the structure of the community hall and the method of committing the crime, even if some victims were in the same situation as the community hall, they could have committed the crime without any difficulty.

③ The Defendant found the victim M’s house that was not found at all on the day of committing the crime, and confirmed whether the victim M would go to the community hall.

④ At the time of the instant crime, six victims of the community hall are the Defendant and six victims, and there are only the Defendant.

⑤ Park Jong-sk’s disease without any lids from Defendant’s pool forest (hereinafter referred to as “bamb’s disease”), and the cambs disease was detected in the above cambs disease, and the term of validity is the same as the production number of the remaining nine cambs from the Defendant’s house to the remainder of the nine cambs found in the Defendant’s house. At the time of permanent stay, there was no identical manufacturing number and validity period in the P. There was no other 40 households. There was little possibility that a criminal other than the Defendant left the instant cambs disease in the Defendant’s pool forest.

② In light of the fact that the Defendant was in contact with the Defendant’s hand, it is difficult to accept the above assertion, and there is no possibility that the Defendant was in contact with the Defendant’s hand, such as the Defendant’s name, mouth, electric car, stick, the instant gambling bottle, and the guns of guns, yellow water, etc., which were in contact with the Defendant’s hand. The result of such detection shows that the Defendant was in contact with the Defendant in the process of committing the crime. However, in light of the fact that the Defendant was in contact with the victim’s hand, the Defendant or his defense counsel did not detect the Defendant’s hand in the process of cutting away the part of the victims’ hand, etc., it is difficult to accept the above assertion, and it is also difficult to suggest other possibility that the part was in contact with

7) The Defendant was able to take adequate relief measures against the victims suffering from mert addiction, out of the community hall, and other victims who come out of the community hall, and did not take any measures even though there was no person who is able to take relief measures other than the Defendant at the scene of crime.

8) After committing the crime, the Defendant first observed the situation within the community center, and identified the causes of the victims accurately.

(9) As long as the statement made by a defendant from the police to the court of the original judgment is inconsistent or objective evidence is not consistent, and the attitude of the defendant, who had been seen from the surrounding persons and the court after the crime, is contrary to the empirical rule on a considerable portion.

3) Order of specific determination

In the trial of the party, the defendant does not make any particular argument, and the defense counsel has presented detailed arguments on the facts or circumstances described in the part of "the defendant's tendency, motive and background of the crime, situation before the crime is committed, and judgment on the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion", which are stated in all the facts and facts of the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, this paper will review the legitimacy of the defense counsel's rebuttal on the facts or circumstances described in the judgment of the court below, and will also examine these circumstances in detail in the "a summary of the above judgment of the court".

C. Specific determination of the party deliberation

1) The defendant's tendency and motive of committing the crime

A) The reasoning of the court below

The Defendant married with H her husband in around 1950, and was frequently confused with her husband who was absent from alcohol and gambling. Due to the violent tendency of her husband, the Defendant frequently faced with serious conflicts with her husband, and had been living a marriage for 40 years, which was not easy to her husband due to damage to her husband’s neighboring house. While the husband died in around 194, the Defendant had experienced difficulties in a smooth interpersonal relationship with others due to stress and violence caused by the strong pressure environment accumulated for a long time, and decline in her self-esteem, which led to a minor emotional problem that is passive in emotional expression or decentralization.

The defendant and the victim J(Y, 86), K (n, 89), L (n, 87 years old), M (n, 73 years old), N (n, 77 years old), and (n), (n, 65 years old) were living in the community center around 14:00 in ordinary hours, and they were living in the community center around 17:00 each.

The defendant and the victims often enjoy the game play at most times in the community center. When the defendant often pointed out that the victim M by means of fraudulent act each time, it is frequently disputed with each other, and there is no relation with the other victims who make it difficult for the defendant to do so. As such, there was a frequent dispute with the victims to the extent that the other victims who are not guilty of the defendant's act, so the appraisal has deteriorated.

During that period, the Defendant and the victims agreed with the first day at the community hall located in Q at the time before the crime was committed, together with meals. The Defendant and the victims argued that the Defendant used the first day in Q as in the usual hall, and the Defendant used the second day in the same manner as in the usual hall.

As above, the Defendant, who experienced difficulties in decentralization, was trying to kill the victim M et al., who continued to feel decentralization to the victim M et al. who did not suffer from the dispute. As such, the Defendant had been able to kill the victim M et al. to the other victims who did not know about mar and the ordinary defendant.

B) Defense Counsel's assertion

Although the Defendant had been suffering from stress due to her husband’s drinking, gambling, violence, etc. before her husband’s death, it is reasonable to view that 20 years have passed and naturally cured as her husband’s drinking, and 20 years have passed. Furthermore, under the strict patriarchal structure as other national women living in the same age, the Defendant may live in the same age and have a passive tendency in emotional expression or decentralization, but it cannot be viewed as a limited tendency only to the Defendant, and it is the common tendency of the women of the same age during Vietnam. In fact, the Defendant has maintained a relatively significant relationship with the residents for 60 years or longer since her husband was permanently living in P at the time of 170 years, and it has not been proven that her husband has reached the age of 194 and has reached the age of 192 years or more without being expressed by her husband. Moreover, deeming that her husband died once more than once since 194 years have passed since her birth.

Even according to the statement of the victim M, the defendant did not claim that the defendant committed a fraudulent act, but the defendant raised a dispute over the amount of 20 won solitary money.

In addition, it is not true that M&M did not have taken place. Even if the Defendant argued that M&M had been seriously against the victim, the cause was 10 won of money that the victim would return, and that the Defendant died due to 10 won. Moreover, if the Defendant died as it is not the Defendant but the victim M, there is no reason for the Defendant to die even if the Defendant died of the victim. Moreover, if the Defendant died of the victim’s death, it is no reason to kill the other victims. If the Defendant died of the victim’s death, it was the victim’s murder in the village, and thus, the Defendant could easily kill M&M if the Defendant died of the victim’s death with the victim’s death, and it was the victim’s death without compensation. In addition, it is difficult for the Defendant to see that it was the victim’s death without compensation, and that it was the only one of the victims’ death residents, other than the victims’ death in the village. The reason for the Defendant’s death of the victim’s death and the Defendant’s death in the village.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) The defendant and the victims were 1 to 5 p.m. 8 p.m. (Evidence 2871, 2876, 938-942, 980-981), and 20 p.m. (Evidence 287 p.m.) the victim's oral statement at the prosecutor's office and court of the court below that they were 1 to 5 p.m. (the victim's oral statement at 7 p.m.) and 1 to 3 p.m. (the victim's oral statement at 5 p.m.) and the victim's oral statement at 1 to 7 p.m. (the victim's oral statement at 7 p.m.) and 1 to 8 p.m. (the victim's oral statement at 1 to 3 p.m. at 5 p., the victim's oral statement at 1 to 20 p.m. (the victim's oral statement at 1 to 37 p.m.).

In addition, the Defendant seems to have experienced difficulties in the smooth personal relations with others due to pressure and decline in self-esteem due to stress and violence on the tension environment, which has been accumulated for a long time, and have a passive tendency in emotional expression or separation (Evidence Records 230-237, 571-580, 1712-1740).

The dispute and conflict between the defendant and the victims as above, and the tendency of the defendant seems to be an opportunity for the defendant to commit a certain crime against the victims. However, it is true that these circumstances alone are not sufficient enough for the defendant to kill the victims.

However, a large number of crimes are not carried out under the dynamic calculation, but under the control of appraisal, this is not an exception to the crime of murder. In other words, even though the general public is a minor question of appraisal, and it may not occur if I think of it, the murder can be committed due to an explosion of the prudent prus.

In the case of this case, in general public, the dispute that occurred during the commission of speculation is very serious, and there is no victim, and the defendant also left away, and for this reason, it may be difficult to think that the defendant murdered by the victims. However, considering that the defendant was in a situation where it was difficult to make a dualistic judgment because it was difficult to control the appraisal at the time, and that the defendant was aged 82 at the time of committing the crime, it cannot be concluded that there is no possibility of murdering the victims solely based on the circumstance that the defendant was under the age of 82 at the time of committing the crime. In particular, the metors can be easily acquired by the elderly defendant and used without difficulties due to mixing with other liquids, and even if the victims could not reach the death, there was no problem in the process of mixing the victims. Therefore, at the time, the defendant was the main means of crime that is suitable for the victim.

2) Circumstances in which the Defendant mixing Mesiums with the Defendant

A) The reasoning of the court below

The Defendant knew that the victims enjoy and drink drinking drinking water, including drinking water, at the ordinary village hall. From July 13, 2015 to July 14, 2015, the time from July 14, 2015, the victims came home, the Defendant 1.5L, the remainder of the time the victims came in the air conditioning bottle (100ml) prepared in advance, was 1.5m in the instant village hall.

B) Defense Counsel's assertion

At around 13:09 on the day of committing the crime, the Defendant 13:09 was getting a electric wheeler at the Defendant’s house, and was frightened, frightened, frightened, frightened, frightened, and frightened to drink at around 14:00. On the CCTV installed in front of the Defendant’s house, the victim L returned to fright to drink at around 13:00 on the day of committing the crime. On the CCTV installed in front of the Defendant’s house, the Defendant was taken at around 13:09, but not taken at around 14:0. The reason was that the CCTV shooting direction was the direction of AZ, while the Defendant went to the direction of AZ when the Defendant moves from the house, the photograph was not taken because the direction was opposite to the time when the photograph was taken.

After drinking maru, the Defendant arrived at the village hall at around 14:10, and the victim J, N, and K had first been placed in the village hall, and the victim 0 was forced to reduce the amount of reduction and the reduction of the reduction of the amount of reduction to the village hall, and the victim M and L arrived at the village hall after diving.

There is no evidence that the defendant went to the community center for the crime of this case from 13:00 to 14:00 on the day of the crime. In other words, there was no person who has observed the defendant to go to the community center during the above-mentioned period (the CCTV installed at the home of the defendant was installed at around 13:17 on the day of the crime, the X-M children at around 13:34, the DG, the husband of N at around 13:35, the DG and the repairer at around 13:44, and the repairer at around 13:44, and the repairer at around 13:44, there was no person who had observed the defendant among the above people).

The victim 0 stated that "the J has left the water, but it is a fluence that it has not yet been frighted." According to this, the victim J was aware of the fact that the victim J was frighting first, and according to the victim 0's statement, the victim J and N was frighting to the village hall. Therefore, the defendant's statement that the victim J, K, and N first arrived at the village hall is not the first day of the day, but the victim J, N, and the defendant's statement that the victim J, K, and N arrived first at the village hall is true. Thus, it is practically impossible for the defendant to mixing the snow of the above victims with the Mesium in light of the defendant's age, physical condition, structure of the village hall, etc.

In this regard, even if three persons, including the victim J, were placed in the ward, and they could not be seen as air conditioners in the kitchen, so it is possible for the defendant to mixed with air conditioners in the room. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that three persons, such as the victim J, were sitting in the room. Rather, the victim J has been putting water in the electric field located in the room. In fact, the victim J was rescued at the room, and the victim J remains in the room, not in the room, and the victim J remains in the room. Furthermore, if the defendant thought that the victim was able to kill the victims, it cannot be deemed that all three persons, such as the victim J, etc., were in the room. Furthermore, if the defendant thought that the victim would be mixed with air conditioners in order to kill the victims, the victims were on the day or the day before the victim arrived, and if so, it is nothing more than the prosecutor's allegation that there was no error in drinking water.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) According to the police statement of R R, police officer AA's legal statement, etc., the first day of the crime was the first day, and all community residents gathered in the community hall, and the defendant and victims got home before around 19:00, and all of them went home before the 19:00, and the community hall was flick (Evidence No. 2658, 2661, and 1443, the record of the public trial). And around 14:00 on the day of the crime, the case occurred after the defendant and victims arrived at the community center.

Therefore, it can be known that the time when the defendant mixed the Mesium with the Mesium is between 19:00 and 14:00 on the day of the crime at around 19:00 on the day of the crime. However, the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below as to whether it is the day before the crime or whether it is the day of the crime, and whether it is a specific time or not, cannot be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below. Therefore, it is inevitable to specify it to the extent that 'the period from 19

(2) The CCTV set up in front of the Defendant’s house was taken from the day immediately before the crime was committed to the day before the crime was committed and the house was opened at around 07:29 on the day of the crime (Evidence No. 1340 pages) and there is only a 13:09 on the day of the crime (Evidence No. 1346 page). However, as there is a defense counsel’s assertion, CCTV recording direction is the direction for AZ, so it is not possible to have access to the opposite direction.

Therefore, although the Defendant was not exposed to CCTV, from 19:00 to 14:00 on the day before the crime was committed, the Defendant was allowed to have access to the Defendant’s house, and the entrance door of the community center was opened at all times according to the police statement of the village head R (Evidence No. 2662). According to the Defendant’s statement of the police statement of the village head R, the Defendant mixing the body door with the house at home and the village hall at home. Even if the Defendant’s defense counsel’s assertion that the Defendant had taken the victim’s house and taken the house at one’s house, he/she may have taken the 13:09 on the day he/she committed the crime to go back to the house at one’s own house after mixing it with the 14:00 on the day of committing the crime.

(3) However, it is difficult for the Defendant to mixing me with the megales in the situation of the mixed person, namely, the situation before the crime was committed or on the day of the crime, where the megain first arrived at the community hall.

If the defendant does not arrive first in the community center on the day of the crime, the situation was the same as some of the victims, and it is relatively possible to commit the crime in such a situation.

In the light of the easy commission of the crime, it seems that the victims were able to have mixed the main contents with the main contents as soon as possible before the victims arrive at the community center. On the other hand, as the defendant is against the victims, it is an important issue whether the victims M, especially the victims, come from the community center on the day of the crime, and if the main contents are mixed with the main contents, it seems that the victims would have committed the crime close to the time when they arrive at the community center.

From the above point of view, the date and time of the crime of the defendant is highly likely to be close to the time when the victims arrive at the community center on the day of the crime.

(4) The evidence to know the date and time of the Defendant’s crime is the victim’s victim’s prosecutorial statement.

According to the above statements, the victim 0 arrived at the community hall above 14:20 on the day of the crime, and the defendant, the victim K, J, and N had already arrived at the community hall, and the victim M and L had arrived later than themselves (Evidence No. 2822 of the record) (Defense Counsel asserts that the order of arrival of the defendant and the victims is the same as in the case of the defendant and the victims).

(5) In light of the above statements made by the victim 0, if the circumstances most favorable to the Defendant were to be considered, the Defendant would be able to mixing with the company in the situation where the victim K, J and N are located in the community hall. We examine whether the Defendant was able to commit the crime under such circumstances.

If all of the above victims were in a ward, there is a closed door between the dwelling space, such as the main room where the air conditioners are located and the air conditioners are located inside the community hall, and there is no way to see the air conditioners on the side of the dwelling space (Evidence Records 392 pages, 222 pages-22 pages-224 pages, the result of on-site inspection of party members), and it is difficult for the defendant to mix the air conditioners in the kitchen.

If all of the above victims are not in a ward and some of them were in a main room, it would not be easy to mixing. However, in light of the following: (i) the main work of a simple work to mixing the Mexane contained in the instant Mescopic disease in order to mixing the Mescopic substance in the company; (ii) the Mescopic disease is a non-special object that can be commonly seen in the surrounding area; and (iii) the Mescopic disease contained in the Mescopic substance is discovered, so it is difficult to see that the Mescopic body is abnormal even if the Mescopic disease is discovered; (iii) the victim K is 89 years old; (iv) the victimJ is 86 years old; and the victim N was 7 years old, it is difficult to Mescopic to commit the crime.

However, if the defendant is mixed with the main contents in the situation where the victim K, J, and N are located in the community center, it is more likely that all the above victims would be mixed with the main contents in the situation where the living room is located. The defense counsel asserts that the above victim was in the main part because the victim J secured water on the electrical set in the main part of the room and was actually used in the main part of the room, but the above victim was not in the main part of the room, so it is sufficient that all the victims of the above three victims committed the gap in the living room.

3) As to the Defendant’s inspection of the victim M’s attitude before leaving the community hall

A) The judgment of the court below

At around 13:09 on July 14, 2015, the Defendant confirmed that the victim M will move to the community hall at the victim M house without any entry.

B) Defense Counsel's assertion

It was true that the defendant had not been placed in the house of the victim M of Pyeongtaek, but on the day of the crime, the victim M was placed in the house of the victim M in order to repair the house accepted due to the recent repair of the victim M. The victim M's son W stated that he had recently been engaged in the installation of a brupt at the recent tap water supply, and that M was also the victim's brupted by the defendant's play.

The prosecutor asserts that the defendant thought that he will kill the victim M on the same day, and that the victim M will find the house of the victim M which he had not been flicked to see his attitude, but the victims including the victim M et al. are gathered every day in the community center, and it is not necessary to confirm whether the victim M et al. will come up with the community center. Rather, if the defendant had mind that the victim M was dead on the same day, the prosecutor did not engage in any behavior that he did not want to conceal his crime for the purpose of hiding the victim M on the same day, and therefore, the victim M was not located in the house of the victim.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

In light of the fact that the defendant, among the victims, frequently disputed with the victim M and claimed that it was different from the victim M even before the crime was committed, the defendant appears to have used the victim M as the subject of the crime, and if the victim M did not go to the community center on the day of the crime, the crime was several prisoners of war, so the defendant was an important concern as to whether the victim M came to the community center. Therefore, the defendant appears to have confirmed whether the victim M was coming to the community center at the house of the victim M which was not located on the day of the crime.

In addition, according to the victim M's prosecutor's statement, there was no only once the book that the defendant was going to go to the normal community center, and found to go to the community center on the day of committing the crime, and he had the intention to go to see whether he was a son, and he was able to go to go to the match in the first place (Evidence Records 2872 pages to 2873 pages).

In light of these circumstances, the fact that the defendant confirmed the victim M as a community hall is very natural in the process of preparing and implementing the crime.

4) As to the fact that the Defendant did not know about the death

A) Defense Counsel's assertion

At the time of the instant case, it was found that there were three different kinds of drinking water in each of the three different types of illness, including call, tampry, and rhea, but, as a result of the identification of the National Institute of Scientific Research, it was found that the instant death was included only in the instant death. Therefore, given that the victims could not be known of certain drinking water, if the Defendant was the victim, the Defendant was in a direct air condition while proposing the victims to be dead, and there was no evidence that the Defendant had committed such an act.

On the other hand, the Defendant was the victim M, and the victim M was asked whether the Defendant was dead. However, the Defendant made a statement that the Defendant would not drink while drinking it. At the time, the victim M, L, the fact that the victim was late, the victim M, M, and L was coming to the highest place, and the victim M and L was coming to the fast weather, and there was no brupted water, and other people did not have any brupted water, because they were seated and have been cut down. Since the victim M and L were not cut down, it was difficult for the Defendant M and L did not have the reduction of capital, they did not have a clean condition, and the victim M were the victim M and L were the victim M were the victim's death as stated in the Defendant's statement, considering the fact that the victim was 5 years or satched compared with the victim L, and that there was a very high possibility that the victim M were the victim M as stated in the lower court's statement to the effect that they did not memory the situation after the victim's statement.

The reason why the Defendant did not know that he was dead is that it was drinking as above. The reason why the Defendant’s house was taken on July 17, 2015, which was after the occurrence of the instant case, was in the main room of the Defendant’s house at the time of searching and searching the Defendant’s house, but did not confirm it by the investigative agency.

B) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) The Defendant and the victims can be identified as to who was the victim of the instant death. ① The victim J and K could not make a statement immediately after the instant death, ② the victim N and L stated that they were not memory in the trial. ③ The victim 0 made a statement that she did not she with her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her hers her her her her her her her her her her her her hers her her her, but the her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her hers his her her her her he her her her her her her her her her her her.

The statement of the defendant and the victims alone cannot identify the person who was suffering from the disease of this case, and it is not clear that the person who was suffering from the disease of this case was arbitr in light of other evidence.

(2) Although the defense counsel asserts that the person who took part in Byung was the victim M, the defense counsel argued that the person who took part in Byung was the victim M, it is merely the side of the prosecution statement of the victim M, it is against the victim M, and the defendant also stated that he was unable to see that he was the victim at the time of the investigation on the day of the crime (the 8th page of the evidence record), and that he was the victim M in the police and the prosecutor's office (the 57, 1377 page of the evidence record), it is difficult to accept the above defense counsel's assertion because there is no consistency in the statements (the 1749 page of the evidence record) and there is no consistency in the statements.

(3) Ultimately, in the sense that the Defendant is the only person who is mixed with the brush of the Defendant’s death, and is the only person who does not have the brush the brush, there is a high probability that the Defendant was able to suggest that the Defendant was brushing or bruting the brush of the instant death (the Defendant is the instant death by mixing the brush with the brush, and then the victims would not have been able to be forced even if the victims would be able to achieve the objective of the brush at the time of the brush and not brush (if so, the Defendant would not be denied the intention of murder). In such a case, the Defendant could not have engaged in any involvement in the brushing and drinking the brush of the instant death, even if the victim M was the death of the instant case, there is no reason to deem otherwise.

5) As to the instant Mambling bottles found at the Defendant’s office Madices

A) The reasoning of the court below

The victims seem to have died due to the toxic action of the climbide, which is the climbide of the carbrate, or to have sought the life of the climbling. However, the disease was found to have been closed at the scene of the crime of this case at the scene of the crime of this case, and the climbism was detected in the above death.

In the absence of any apparent lids from the Defendant’s house, the instant Parklass Disease (Evidence No. 1 that was seized) and the Dongmers Disease (Evidence No. 6 that was seized) (hereinafter “the instant Mes Disease”) were discovered, and the said Mes Disease was detected from the above Mes Disease, and the said Mes Disease was found from the above Mes Disease, and the said Mes Disease was identical to the manufacturing number and validity period of the remaining 9 Mes Diseases found in the Defendant’s house. The investigative agency searched 40 households other than the Defendant’s house in P at the time of stay, but did not find the same Mes Disease.

B) Defense Counsel's assertion

C. The Defendant’s gambling number of the same gambling number of the same gambling number of the instant gambling type was 294,300, and among them, approximately 4,000 gams supplied to AZ prior to the date of the crime. As such, it cannot be readily concluded that the instant gambs C was in the Defendant’s house solely on the ground that the manufacturing number of gambling type discovered inside the Defendant’s house corresponds to that of gambling type.

According to the prosecutor's assertion, the defendant completed the police investigation at around 19:30 on the day of the crime, and returned to the house. At around 19:30, the defendant left the house, and the police officer belonging to the permanent police station discovered the above gambling disease in the defendant's home pool on July 15, 2015, the following day. As such, the above gambling disease was exposed to the outside for 20 hours. However, when compared to the two gamblings inside the defendant's house, it can not be easily different in terms of its situation from the defendant's house, and it cannot be damaged to the extent that the soil and foreign material were laid, cut off or leaked. The defendant's assertion that the gambling disease in the day of the crime did not have been cut off on the day of the crime, and even if he did not leave the place where the gambling disease in this case, he did not have any persuasive influence in the whole gambing, he cannot ask the public prosecutor's.

The prosecutor asserts that the instant gams found in the Defendant’s house constituted 7 gams Byung and gams Byung, police officers, and gams Byung, and gams Byung, which were provided in the Defendant’s house, and gams 10 and 10 gams. Thus, the instant gams found in the Defendant’s house were left in the house after committing the crime. However, this assertion is an urgent premise on the premise that the Defendant purchased gams 1 gams and did not drink one. around May 2015, the Defendant was given a gift of gams 1 and 2 gams from the Defendant’s birth and stored in the Defendant’s house, and that gams 1 and gams were removed from the Defendant’s house to the Defendant’s house at any time after collecting gams 8 to the Defendant’s children’s house, such as gambling.

Unless it is revealed that the Mescams and the Mescams detected by the instant Mescam are the Mescams of the manufacturing company, it is difficult to readily conclude that the said Mescamscam was used for the instant crime.

R, after the occurrence of the instant case, initially testified at an investigative agency that “in case where she heard the opinion that she was written, she did not close lids of Byung?” The court below made the same statement at the same time, and S and T also made it that lids of Park S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S was not closed in the process of providing relief to the victims of the instant case, it is highly probable that it is not related to this case.

The Defendant’s fingerprints or genes was not detected in the instant company Byung, Park Kask’s disease, and Mesky’s disease. The prosecutor inferred that the Defendant was frightened, committed a crime, or was able to have his fingerprints after committing a crime. However, if the Defendant committed the instant crime closely as above, he did not commit a frightening lids in Byung. Furthermore, the Defendant did not neglect the instant Mesky’s joint Mesky’s disease, which was used in committing the instant crime.

After undergoing an investigation on the day of the crime, the Defendant was a community hall and went back to the house. Since there are many grass forests and arguments from the house, it is hard to understand that the Defendant left the house with a house and throw away from the house to another place until the seizure of the house was conducted at around 15:30 following the day. Moreover, under the CCTV of the AV box, the Defendant did not seem to have held a house house. Furthermore, according to the AA’s court statement at the court below, the Defendant did not leave the house house as it was for the entire community residents, and the Defendant did not leave the house house to find the house house house for the purpose of finding the whole community residents from the day of the crime, and the Defendant did not leave the house house for the purpose of finding the house house house as it was found that the Defendant did not leave the house house for the purpose of finding the house house for the entire community residents, and the instant smuggling was found to have been used by the Defendant on July 17, 2015.

Therefore, the above mets Byung is the defendant's death after the occurrence of this case by Jin's crime.It is highly probable that the defendant would have caused a witness's investigation, or that the defendant would have caused a large father's house in Daegu and brought about the house of the defendant to the house of the defendant with the knowledge that he would not end up.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) ① The victims were killed due to the reading action of the Cabacideide, Kabacide, and sought a brupted life, ② the instant company, which is closed at the scene of the instant crime, was found to have a brush lid, and Byung was found to have a brut from Byung. ③ The instant brut disease without a lid on July 15, 2015 from the Defendant’s brut forest was discovered on July 17, 2015 (Evidence evidence records, 77 pages, 161 pages), and all of the instant brut disease were discovered from the Defendant’s brut disease at the scene of the instant crime, and there was no possibility of detection of the brut lids from the Defendant’s frut lids that were closed at the scene of the instant crime, and there was no possibility of detection of the brut 160 to 1548 brut lids.

[However, it is also true in view of the fact that it is not clear whether it is possible to confirm such a fact (see, e.g., 1320 to 132 of the trial record).

① Furthermore, in full view of the facts found in the Defendant’s office, ② The instant Park Kaskick’s discovery in the Defendant’s office (Evidence No. 131, No. 226, No. 229) and the term of validity are the same as that of the Defendant’s office (Evidence No. 131, No. 226, No. 229), ③ Police searched 40 households other than the Defendant’s office located at the time of committing the crime, but the same period of validity as the manufacturing number was not found (Evidence No. 1875, No. 1886, No. 1463, No. 1475, Dec. 1, 187; and No. 1463, No. 1475).

(2) As alleged by defense counsel, if the defendant in this case assumes that there is another criminal who is not the criminal but the criminal defendant has committed a crime, the criminal defendant would only have left the instant kys soldier in the defendant's house in order to let the defendant identify the criminal as the criminal after committing the crime. If so, the criminal defendant is not only a person who is well aware of the house of the ordinary defendant and the defendant, but also a person who was the only person among those who was at the community hall on the day of committing the crime, who was well aware of the fact that he was the criminal, was at the scene of the crime, or was at the scene of the crime, or was at the scene of the crime, and there was no record that there was such person.

In addition, Jins knew that the manufacturing number and the validity period of other gambling soldiers discovered in the house of the defendant are identical to that of the other gambling bottles from the branch of the defendant's office, or they had never known, but they had little ever been.

First of all, I would like to find the possibility that the truth-finding could have known. The general public does not know the fact that a certain quantity of gambling is identical to the manufacturing number, and the truth-finding should take advantage of the defendant's house or confirm the manufacturing No. 1 of the gambling car in the defendant's house and then leave the defendant's house-raising forest after obtaining the same manufacturing number. This possibility is extremely low.

Next, we examine the possibility of getting out of the instant gambly. The number of gambly produced by the same gambly from the instant gambly to the same gambly 294,300 disease, and the quantity supplied to the gambly prior to the day of the commission of the crime is not a small number of 4,000 disease. However, the aforementioned 294,30 disease was produced from April 28, 2015 to 21:00, from April 29, 2015 to 08:45 of the same month, from around 08:30 to 08:45 of the same month, during which the entire gambly gambly produced and distributed to the Republic of Korea (the trial record 123 to 124 pages). ② In the case of the instant gambly gambly located in each of the instant gambly located on the same gambly located on the same day (one to 12000 to gam.

(3) With respect to the status of Park Jong-chul in the instant case, ① the Defendant appears to be able to damage the surface on which the amount of raw material flow flows in the process of transferring the body to Park Byung-si in the instant case, ② the National Research and Investigation Service affiliated with the National Research and Investigation Service (Public Trial Records 1308~1309), ② the place where Park Byung-si was abandoned in the instant case (Evidence Records 87 pages), ③ although not formally recorded, it was not recorded, ③ according to the police officer’s testimony at each court ruling at the lower court below, Z, A, which was a police officer, and even if not recorded, it did not appear that the Defendant was able to pay the money to the extent that it is reasonable on the day of the commission of the crime (Public Trial Records 1391, 1405~1406, 1406, 1430), and YB’s statement at the court of the lower court at the police officer AB, the police officer’s statement at the lower court below did not seem to have any damage the trial record (1564-7 pages).

In addition, considering the situation where the appearance of the instant gams Byung at the time of discovery (Evidence 1, Evidence Nos. 86 pages 86 to 89 pages), it does not seem that the damage to the extent that it cannot be deemed that the instant gams Byung existed from the same gams as other gams in the Defendant’s house.

(4) On July 15, 2015, the following day after the crime was committed, the police officer AA and Z found the instant kysick in the Defendant’s house, followed the Defendant’s house by being provided with ambling 1 disease by the Defendant’s ASEAN in the Defendant’s house, and then ambling ambling ambling kys as they are. The Z had a police station for an empty ambling kys (Evidence No. 131, No. 1353-1354, No. 1379, No. 1417). In addition, on July 17, 2015, the police officer found the Defendant’s house at the Defendant’s house, and found the 17 ambling 2, 2700 ambling 2, 170 ambling 174 ambling ambling from the Defendant’s house (excluding the ambling 17 amb.

As such, all 10 kys’s disease that was found in the Defendant’s house, including the instant kys’ disease, are all 10 kys’ disease. The above 10 kys’ disease is identical to the manufacturing number and validity period (Evidence No. 226). The defense counsel asserts that the kys’ disease found as above are accurately 10 kys’ disease and 10 kys’ one kys’ disease. However, if the Defendant did not leak out to the outside, it is entirely natural kys’ house, as it is, the Defendant’s house cannot be found.

(5) After the crime of this case, R, which was the first witness of the instant company, was saf in the police station. Although Saf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insaf insafs

On the other hand, police officers arrive at the scene of the crime and at the time of seizure.

In other words, S made a statement that S was unable to memory as to whether there was a lid (Evidence Records 2684 pages), ① CF of 119 first time was Skickick (Evidence Records 289 pages), ② Community residents were aware of the lids, but CF was closed at the time of Skick (Evidence Records 289 pages), ② Community residents stated that CF was lids was lids, but CF was lids, which was close at the time of the first time (Evidence Records 842 pages), and that CF was lids, and that CF of the case was closed at the time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the second time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the first time of the second time of the second time of the second time.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defense counsel's assertion that it was possible to close lids in Skys in Skys in Skys, or that she can close Skys in Skys around Skys after the occurrence of this case.

(6) The police had a gene identification and fingerprints identification about the instant death, gams, and Mesium disease, but no genetic or fingerprints was found (Evidence Records 313 to 316 pages, 857 to 859 pages). In other words, even though the Defendant’s genetic or fingerprints was not discovered, the Defendant’s genetic or fingerprints was not discovered, but the victims and other people, including the victims, did not have any genetic or fingerprints found.

이 사건 범행 전후 피해자들이 사이다를 나누어 마신 것은 분명하고 그 과정에서 누군가는 사이다 병을 손에 쥘 수밖에 없었을 것이며, 이 사건 범행 이후 T이 사이다 병을 집어서 119 구급대원에게 전달하였다(공판기록 842쪽~ 843쪽). 그럼에도 사이다 병에 피해자들이나 T 등 누구의 유전자나 지문도 발견되지 않은 점에 비추어 보면, 피고인이 사이다 병을 맨손에 쥐었음에도 피고인의 유전자나 지문이 발견되지 않는 것을 두고 이상하다고 볼 것은 아니다.

Furthermore, in light of the fact that the interior was kept and seized immediately after the crime was committed, and that no genes or fingerprints has been found in the sick, there is a natural phenomenon that does not discover any genes or fingerprints in the Gamass Disease or the Mamass Disease which was destroyed by leaving the outdoor for long time.

(7) It is natural that the victims were boomed to close lids from booms, and it was inevitable to suspect the Defendant as the offender by discovering an empty lids and an empty booms which constitute a combination with the Defendant’s house. In fact, the discovery of the instant booms at the Defendant’s house became an important opportunity to suspect the Defendant as the offender. Therefore, if a person is determined ex post facto, the crime of this case was committed even if he did not commit the instant booms at his own house or not commit the instant booms.

However, the defendant was 82 years old at the time of the crime of this case. ② The victims were the victims of the crime of this case. ③ The defendant was investigated by the police station on the day of the crime, and appears to have never been a light (Evidence No. 55 pages). (No. 40 police officers from the day of the crime of this case were investigating the village residents and searching for search (Evidence No. 63 pages of the trial record, No. 1419~ 1420 pages of the trial record), ⑤ After the defendant returned home, there was no time for the defendant to look at the defendant's house and police officers, and the defendant was found at the time of the crime of this case, and the defendant was investigated at AV as AO around 13:0 on the following day, and the defendant was found to have been 15:30 on the same day, and the defendant was found to have been 70 on the day of the crime of this case, and the defendant was found to have been 15:6 on the day of the crime of this case.

더구나 피고인이 이 사건 박카스 병이나 메소밀 병을 다른 곳에 은닉하려다 경찰관이나 주변 사람들에게 발각되기라도 하면 꼼짝없이 범인으로 지목될 수 있다는 점에 비추어 보더라도, 이 사건 박카스 병을 자신의 집에 버리고 메소밀 병을 다른 곳으로 치우지 않은 피고인의 행동은 충분히 수긍이 된다.

6) The reasons why the defendant was asked to wear clothes, etc. of the defendant

A) The reasoning of the court below

At the time the victims were addicted to the smuggling, all of the clocks and booms (a wide range of parts, such as the part on the back side, the left part, the part on the back side, the part on the back side) of the defendant's boarding and a community hall, the click for personal use in the defendant's house (hereinafter referred to as "the above defendant's name, flick, the front part, the part on the body, the part on the back part), and the stick for personal use in the defendant's house (hereinafter referred to as "the clothes, etc. of the defendant"), which are recognized as being a click for the victims.

B) Defense Counsel's assertion

With respect to the process of detection of Mestains in the defendant's clothes, the prosecutor asserts that first, the defendant was able to ask the defendant's hand, and that the Mestains that flown in the process of transferring the Mestains to Byung was transferred to the defendant's clothes, etc., and second, after committing the crime, the prosecutor asked the defendant's clothes, etc. due to the Mestains that flown while entering the Mestains of this case into the defendant's clothes.

First, if the Defendant’s hand was asked in the process of putting the brush onto Byung as the Defendant’s hand, the Defendant used her mother on the day of the commission of the crime and exceeded her mother and her mother in hand after having arrived at the community hall, and thus the her mother was found out of the her mother and her mother, but the me was not found in the her mother and her mother, and the me was not found in the her mother and her mother. Furthermore, the prosecutor’s assertion that the Defendant was not found in the her mother and her mother, such as her cold and her hand, was not found. Second, there was no me to put the Defendant into the bruick, and that the Defendant was laid into the cell phone and the her key in CCTV.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) On July 14, 2015, the Police and the National Institute of Scientific Investigation collected, seized, etc. articles suspected of being related to all liquid stay in the community hall on the day of the crime. On the 15th day of the same month, the instant gambling bottle was seized. On the 17th day of the same month, the Defendant’s belongings was seized, etc., and on the 7th day of the same month, the bambal analysis was conducted on the relevant liquid stay, articles, blood of victims, etc. (Evidence Records from 77 pages-78 to 78, 143 to 156, 161 to 190, 311 to 316, 834 to 91, 1847 to 1849 pages).

As a result, the company of this case, which was located in the community center, Byung, Scam lids, which was closed in Byung Byung, brug brug brus, brugs, straws, scrugs, prugs, prus, and victims' blood, clothes of the defendant, etc., were detected in the brugs of this case.

(2) It is reasonable for the victims to have been addicteded to brush lids, brug brus, and brugs from the blood of the victims, all of which are the company of this case, which were closed in the company of this case at the same time as the company of this case, were addicted to the brush after the brush, depending on the brush.

(3) The detection of the Defendant’s clothes, etc. as above refers to the Defendant’s direct contact with the Defendant’s body. Moreover, the Defendant did not see that the Defendant was a company containing the meine contained in the Defendant’s body. Meanwhile, with respect to the possibility that the Defendant, other than the Defendant, could have meineed in the Defendant’s body, there was no evidence that the Defendant had committed a crime other than the Defendant on the record, and there was no evidence that there was a crime other than the Defendant on the record, not all the articles in the Defendant’s body, but only limited to the Defendant’s body, boom, electric car, and stick, and as seen below, there was no possibility that the Defendant was me to ask the Defendant with only a small amount of the meine contained in the Defendant’s clothes, etc., and there was no possibility as above.

If so, as seen earlier along with the above detection, the Defendant appears to have been using the instant gambling bottle as a criminal tool, it would be the most common and reasonable to view that the Defendant was her hand in the process of being her handed or her handed in the process of being moved to Byung, or her handed into a stop stop or yellow laps, and then her hand was moved to the clothes, etc. of the Defendant.

(4) On the other hand, we examine the Defendant’s mother and child and the village hall cooling, where the megain was not detected (Evidence No. 908 pages), and the mother and child first.

In other words, even if the defendant's hand does not ask or asked his mother and child's hand at the time of contact with her mother and child, it is highly likely that her hand can not be detected because her hand is extremely small. In other words, the defendant's hand and her hand are frequently contacted with the defendant's hand, the her hand and her hand are always contacted, while the her hand and her hand are in contact with his hand at any time at the house. On the other hand, the mother and her hand are used lower when moving from the defendant's house to other place such as the village hall, etc. from time to time. On the other hand, when the her hand moves from the defendant's house to another place, the her hand and her hand do not again become a her hand if used. Thus, the frequency of use is low, and the defendant's hand and the number of

In light of the fact that the National Institute of Scientific Investigation conducted identification of the clothes, etc. of the defendant and conducted secondary identification for accurate confirmation by stating the very small amount of meconiums detected as a result (see, e.g., the clothes, etc. of the defendant who has been in contact with the defendant's grandchildren, i.e., the gar, fry, electric dynamics, and stick, and the amount of meconiums detected in the primary test, it is sufficiently acceptable that the defendant's mother's mecons not detection of meconsort is sufficiently acceptable.

(5) Next, we examine the cooling house of the community hall.

First, at the time of opening or closing the air conditioners, it is likely that the Defendant was not detected as it was influence even if he was not charged with the air conditioners or was charged with the air conditioners. In other words, if the Defendant was charged to his hand in the process of moving the air conditioners from the house to other places, the air conditioners may ask the air conditioners used by the Defendant at the house. However, after a certain degree of time from the time of opening the air conditioners, the air conditioners at the Defendant’s house, which were located within a considerable distance from the Defendant’s hand at the time of opening the air conditioners, can only be found to have been influenceed or not detected by the Defendant’s hand. As seen earlier, in light of the Defendant’s hand, stick, stick, stick, and the possibility of detecting the air conditioners by considering the possibility of detecting the air conditioners as above.

Second, although the Defendant did not ask the air to his hand at the time of heating the cooling, it can be presented that the Defendant was in the air conditioners, but the air conditioners were tight. In this case, when the air conditioners are opened, the air conditioners shall not be adhered to the air conditioners, and when the air conditioners are closed, but the air conditioners are not closed by hand (in the daily life of the Defendant, it is frequent to close the air conditioners with other parts than the hand) and air conditioners and air conditioners are not adhered to the air conditioners. Moreover, the air conditioners and air conditioners do not directly contact the losses and air conditioners by using locks, hands, suspension, etc.

Third, even if the defendant was in a state where he was found to be able to detect food at the time of opening a cooling and closing, he could use a method that does not directly contact his hand and cooling with him using the lock, etc. as seen earlier. Moreover, the village president, at around 15:43 (Evidence Records No. 157 pages) on the day he reported the crime of this case, R, a community resident, first aid workers, etc., who discovered the accident site at around 16:30 (Evidence Records No. 834, No. 849 of Evidence Records No. 16:30 (Evidence Records No. 834 of Evidence Records, No. 849 of Evidence Records), and it is possible to open a cooling at several times to confirm food remaining after checking the cause of the accident.

Therefore, it can be sufficiently acceptable that the megade is not detected in the cooling, and it cannot be said that there is no reasonable doubt that this is guilty of the facts charged in this case.

7) As to the defendant's assertion as to the circumstances in which the defendant's clothes, etc. was detected with Meaks

A) The reasoning of the court below

The defendant asserts that the defendant's clothes, etc. detected from the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the breath of the breath of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the blost of the defendant.

B) Defense Counsel's assertion

The floor of the community hall room had a liquid and gens seen as the body of the victims, in addition to the body of the victims, but the body and gens were not found to have been used for the body of the victims. Thus, all liquid and gens were not taken and inspected. The Defendant’s clothes, etc. were found to have been found to have been found to have been used for the body of the victims. ① The Defendant’s clothes, etc. was found to have been discovered in the body of the victims on the day of the crime of this case. The Defendant’s clothes, etc. were found to have been found to have been used for the body of the victims during the process of cutting the body of the victims into the body of the victims, and it was possible that the body of the victims might have been transferred to the body of the victims in the process of making the body of the victims known to the possibility that they could have been moved to the body of the victims during the process of breaking the body of the victims. ③ The Defendant could have been able to ask the victims under the influence of the body of the victims.

In particular, as to the possibility (1) above, it is true that the victims did not detect the body in a scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scops, but the victims might have remaining scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scheic scopic scopic s.

With regard to the circumstances in which the crux was detected in the defendant's clothes, etc., the prosecutor asserts that the crux was moved to the defendant's clothes in the process of moving the crux to Sks branch, and that the crux was moved to the defendant's clothes, etc., and that the crux was cut back and then moved to a yellow crushes. Thus, as argued by the prosecutor, the crush was detected in a small amount of brush and yellow crushes in the body of the defendant, but the crush was actually opposed thereto.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) We examine the assertion that all liquid stays on the floor of the living room within the community hall were not taken and inspected.

In this regard, it is not clear whether the liquid and water leakage, which seems to be like the water claimed by the defense counsel that the defense counsel did not take and inspect, are referred to as the liquid and water leakages, but at the time, can be seen as salvable (Evidence Records No. 870 pages). At the time, the police mobilized more than 10 identification scientific investigation personnel and collected all amounts of salvous results on the floor of the living room including the old soil No. 11 (Evidence Records No. 903 pages, 1559~1560 pages, 1574 pages), were not detected (Evidence Records No. 903 pages, 1574 of the trial record).

Therefore, this part of the argument is without merit.

(2) We examine the assertion that the Defendant’s clothes, etc. were asked due to the her draft of the floor.

First of all, it is not easy to understand that the Defendant continued to keep up until seizure took place around July 17, 2015 (Evidence No. 143, trial record No. 1618), and if the amount of her and the victims were detained in the Defendant’s whereabouts, it would be difficult to understand that the Defendant had her daily life while coming from her husband’s house while suffering from the Defendant’s death (Evidence No. 1559 to 1560 of the trial record). Moreover, it is difficult to view that the Defendant suffered from Trts on the day of the commission of the instant crime, and the Defendant continued to keep up until seizure at around 10:58 of the day following the commission of the instant crime (Evidence No. 143, No. 1618 of the trial record). In light of the aforementioned circumstances, it is difficult to see that there was no possibility that Trts had been her daily life on the day of the commission of the instant crime (Evidence No. 1340 of the evidence record).

(3) We examine the assertion that the main contents of the company, which remains in the drafting of the victims or was detained in the entrance, were transferred to clothes, etc. by the defendant's hand during the course of cleaning the victims' injuries.

(A) First of all, the above possibility assertion is inconsistent with the identification result (Evidence No. 903 pages) and the static aspect of the actual victims, which has not been detected with meconium in the powder of the victims.

(B) We examine the possibility of 'the death cited as the basis of the above assertion' that remains or was dead at the time of the drafting immediately after the end of the period.

It seems that the possibility that the victims might have been dead was very low, and even if they were dead, the amount seems to have been extremely weak. The possibility that the victims would have been dead even if they were dead, even if they were dead, even though they were able to ask for the possibility that they were dead.

In addition, according to the FX's court's statement at the court below's court hearing, a large number of megasiums were detected in the guns and yellow cases to the extent that it is not necessary to conduct secondary inspections (the trial records 1324 pages), and even if there was a death at the drafting or entrance prices, their quantity appears to have been extremely low. Thus, if megasiums discovered in the suspended guns and yellow waters were turned out due to the Defendant's washing of the amount of the victims, it should be found that a large amount of megasiums were found in the guns and yellow waters to the extent that they were extremely insignificant in the guns and yellow waters. However, it is not inconsistent with the intention that a large amount of megasiums were detected in the guns and yellows of guns as above.

(C) We examine the possibility of 'the possibility of being asked with mershion' in the first time, which is cited as the basis of the above assertion.

The victims were dead and used as symptoms for addiction, and the part of others were left around the floor. As seen earlier, the National Science Investigation Agency collected all liquid stay at the scene of the crime of this case and did not detect the meconium as a result of identification. If so, as the defense counsel's assertion, the remaining portion of the meconium remains at the scene can explain the results of identification by the National Science Investigation Agency only when the defendant removed all of the initial portion of the meconium. However, it seems practically impossible for the elderly defendant to remove all of the parts of the meconium without removal, and even if the initial part was removed, it cannot explain the reasons why the removal of the meconium did not remove the meconium.

In this regard, the defense counsel, even if the defendant did not cut the part of the victims without leaving the part of the victim until the village hall, there is a possibility that the defendant might not contain the part of the victim after he laid the part of the victim's part, and there is a possibility that the part of the victim's part of the part of the part of the victim's part of the part of the part of the victim's part of the part of the part of the part of the victim's part of the part of the part of the part of the victim's part of the part of the part of the part of the victim's part of the part of the part of the

I argue that this is a matter of interest.

① As to the above argument, it seems practically impossible for the Defendant to remove all of the initial components of Megatables without leaving the Megatables containing Megatables.

② We examine the above argument. The National Institute of Scientific Investigation found small amount of merculations from the defendant's clothes, etc., so that it could not be confirmed by the first prosecutor, and the second prosecutor could not conduct the second examination (record 1323~1324 of the trial record), and if the victim's merculations were cut off by the stop and yellow scams of the defendant's clothes as argued by the defense counsel, the victim's merculations were cut off by the stop and yellow scams of the defendant's clothes in the process, it should be found that a large amount of mercs from the victim's mercs of the defendant's clothes, such as suspended mercs and yellow scams of the defendant's clothes, and the victim's clothes were detected in a large amount of merculations from the victim's mercs, but the victim's clothes was detected in a small amount of 1323 mercs of the trial record (part 1323 of the trial record).

In light of these circumstances, it seems that the method of inspection is not an issue.

(D) We examine the following facts: (a) 'the assembly of guns and scamblings of the National Science Investigation Institute as the basis of the above assertion was detected in scamblings and yellows.'

As seen earlier, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant moved to the guns and yellow shots, which flow out in the course of transferring the macks to Byung directly or through Defendant’s hand, as seen earlier, it is reasonable to view that the macks, which flow out in the course of transferring the macks to Byung, were moved to the guns and yellow shots. Therefore, such circumstances cannot serve as the basis for supporting

(E) We examine the following points: “The genes of the victim M was detected in the dead body, which is cited as the basis of the above assertion.”

In light of the fact that the victims were found to have discovered the genes of the victim N,O, and L (Evidence Records - 2169 pages - 2175 pages) in a breging bre which is the degree of dancing that the victims may sustain, it seems to be common to detect genes in the object if they were directly buried in a certain object. The CL of the National Institute of Scientific Investigation stated to the effect that the occurrence of genes is general if the victims were asked for the suspension in the trial. As the defense counsel argues, if the victim 0 was sent back to the 119 emergency squad, and the defendant continued to remove the products of the remaining victims after coming into the community hall, the amount is not limited, and therefore, the genes of the victims other than the victim M was not detected (Evidence Records 2169-2175 pages - 2175 pages 2175).

In light of these circumstances, at least the Defendant may not regard the rest victims, excluding the victim M, as unsepting the relevant powder. On the other hand, the reason for the discovery of the victim M’s genes is that the Defendant, like the defense counsel’s assertion, appears to have been due to the suspension of the use of the victim M, but the location of the removal of the guns and the suspension of the Defendant’s cutting the victim’s M was not explained as they were placed in the site, and the use of the guns was more likely to have been used by the victim by means of the fact that the victim’s hand-off or cutting down the M was left at the site, etc. (only if the Defendant was found to have cut the part of the victim’s M, it is difficult to view that the Defendant already terminated the implementation and prevented the occurrence of the result solely by the above degree, and it does not constitute a crime of suspension under Article 26 of the Criminal Act).

Ultimately, taking into account the existence of various objective circumstances suggesting that the Defendant is an offender, even if the genes of the Victim M was detected in the chain of suspension, it does not seem to be a circumstance that leads to a reasonable doubt by recognizing the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case.

(f) As seen earlier, the defense counsel argued that the victims' clothes, etc. of the defendant did not have any scientific investigation into the causes for which the victims' genes were not detected, and that such fact alone does not lead to the conclusion that the defendant did not have any injury to the victims. In detail, the defendant's exposure to the body of the defendant is found to have been found to have been found to have been included in the mouth cells, and in the process of the defendant's exposure to other items, the victims' exposure to the symptoms was found to have been infiniteless by the origin of the symptoms. As such, there is a high possibility that the victims did not have any oral cell, and there was no possibility that the victims' genes were found to have been found to have been found to have been found to have been caused by a partial inspection, and the victim's exposure to the body of the defendant during the process of the crime of this case, especially the possibility of genetic loss and the possibility of storing the body of the victims, and the possibility of the defendant's exposure to the body during the process of the crime of this case.

(1) As to the above argument, according to the CL’s trial statement, it is difficult to view that the oral skin cells were found to have been laid down in the face of a human body, and that there was a large number of oral skin cells in a large amount, and that the amount was not found to have been laid out in the other amount. Furthermore, according to the defense counsel’s assertion, the victim’s genes was found in the suspended guns, unlike other victims, there was an oral somatic cell only in the other amount of the victim’s M, and that there was no reason for different victims from the other victims. Accordingly, this part of the assertion is without merit.

② In light of the fact that the victim M’s genes was detected in a health unit or a suspended engine, the above argument seems not to be a matter of testing method. Therefore, this part of the argument is without merit.

③ We examine the above argument. According to the CL’s oral statement, the possibility of genetic loss due to water contained in the Mesium or other chemical composition is not reported, and the mixture between victims’ genes is not limited to a specific person’s genes, and there is no possibility of loss in the process of storage and inspection in this case.

Finally, this paper examines the possibility of destruction or loss of genes which are contained in the previous and previous dynamics through the external environment, etc. which can be seen in the future.

CL의 당심 법정진술에 의하면, 유전자가 묻은 바지를 입은 채 잠을 자는 등 일상생활을 함으로써 묻어 있던 유전자가 없어지기도 한다는 것이다. 실제 피고인은 범행 당시 입었던 바지를 며칠 동안 그대로 입은 채 일상생활을 하였으므로[범행 당시, 입었던 피고인의 바지는 2015. 7. 17. 10:58경 압수되었다(증거기록 143면), 피해자들의 유전자가 소실되었을 가능성을 배제할 수 없다. 그렇다고 하더라도 피해자들의 유전자가 전혀 검출되지 않았다는 것은 이해하기 어렵고, 특히 피고인의 원심에서의 진술 즉 피해자 0의 분비물을 휴지로 닦아주었고 흠뻑 젖은 그 휴지를 그 상태로 피고인의 바지 주머니에 넣었다는 것이라면(공판기록 1764면 ~1766면), 피해자 0의 유전자마저 완전히 소실되었다는 것은 납득하기 어렵다. 그리고 특히 전동차는 바지와 다르다. 전동차는 2015. 7. 17. 피고인의 집을 수색하던 중 발견되어 압수되었고(증거기록 161면), 압수될 당시 지붕과 벽으로 둘러싸인 창고에 보관되어 있었다(증거기록 169면), 한편 피고인은 범행 당일 AV파출소에서 조사를 받고 마을회관으로 와서 전동차를 타고 귀가하였다(증거기록 360면), 그리고 다음날인 2015. 7. 15. 아들인 AO와 같이 AV 파출소로 가서 조사를 받고(공판기록 1612면, 증거기록 55면), 같은 날 15:30경 AO와 같이 피고인의 집에 들렀다가(증거 기록 77면), 바로 큰딸인 DE의 집으로 갔다(공판기록 1618면), 따라서 이 사건 범행 이후 압수될 때까지 피고인이 전동차를 사용한 것은 범행 당일 마을회관에서 집으로 올 때뿐이었고, 이후 외부적 환경의 영향을 별로 받지 않은 상태로 창고에 보관되어 있었다.

As such, it is difficult to understand that the genes of the victims was completely lost at the defendant's bar site, and even if the G counsel's assertion, at least it seems that the victims' genes should have been detected at least at the same time (Evidence records 909, 955 pages) [In contrast, the defendant's genes were detected in cambling bottles, which were seized on July 17, 2015 (Evidence Records 162, 907 pages)]. Even if the victim's cL's cL's oral statement was taken into the defendant's clothes or electric dynamics, it is common to detect the victim's genes if the victim's cam or electric dynamics were found to have been found to have not been affected by the external defense counsel, and thus, it is not reasonable to deem that the victim's cam was also detected in the situation other than the victim's cambal of the other victims.

(4) We examine the argument that the defendant had been asked with the whole-time gap of the defendant on the part of the victim 0.

According to the victim 0's statement in the court below, the defendant did not discuss at the time (the trial record 1212 pages), and X's statement in the court below also did not see that the victim 0 was about the Gu (the trial record 1191 pages), and the victim 119 first responder CF and FY stated to the police that the victim 0 was about the Gu (the evidence record 288 pages 288~289 pages), but the victim 0 and X stated to the effect that the victim 0 was about the Gu (the evidence record 288 pages 288~289 pages), together with the above victim 0 and X's statement to the effect that the victim was about the part of the other victims, and the victim was about the part of the other victims' living room, and the National Science Investigation Research Institute, which found the victim's other part of the Gu's opinion to be the old soil (the evidence record 312 pages).

In addition, the above argument is not reasonable in light of the fact that the defendant's clothes, etc. did not detect the victim's 0 genes, and if the defendant's above assertion is made, it is not reasonable in light of the fact that the defendant's name, appearance, and stick also does not explain the reason for detection of mert.

(5) We examine the allegation on the quantity of detected meconscure.

According to the FX's court's statement at the court below's court below, a large quantity of mershs were detected in suspended guns and yellow cases, and a small quantity of mershs were detected in the Defendant's name, boom, electric car and stick (1323 pages - 1324 of the trial record).

In the process of transferring the Mexane contained in the instant Mexick to the instant Mexick, the Defendant’s name, boom, electric car, stick is not directly contacted with the Mexane, and thus, the Mexane should be detected less than the Mexine.

On the other hand, in the process of transferring the crypoids of this case to Byung, the crypoids of this case are used to remove the crypoids that flown, or to detect the crypoids that are loaded by the Defendant’s hand, and thus, the crypoids of the crypoids of this case are directly contacted, so the crypoids of guns and crypines of cryp shall be detected in the cryp.

Therefore, the contents of the FX’s statement in the lower court are natural results according to the Defendant’s criminal act process (see, e.g., Supreme Court records 1851). The prosecutor’s assertion is not different (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 1851; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da14488, Apr. 2, 201).

(6) On the other hand, although the defense counsel did not assert any defense counsel, it is not the process for the defendant to mixing the body secrets with Byung who is the defendant's death, but it is another route to ask the defendant's clothes, etc. with several possibilities.

Since the defendant did not see that the defendant was a mersh including mersh, there is no possibility that the defendant could ask the defendant's clothes, etc. in the process of drinking that he was a mersh.

Although the defendant raises a garden, in light of the defendant's statement (Evidence Nos. 1437 of the evidence record), the defendant's statement that he does not use the crypt (Evidence No. 1437 of the evidence record), the fact that the crypt was not detected in other agricultural chemical diseases stored in the defendant's house (Evidence No. 316 of the evidence record), and the fact that the crypt was not detected in other personal items than the defendant's clothes (Evidence No. 316 of the evidence record), it seems that there is little possibility that the defendant was crypted in the defendant's clothes in the process of growing a garden.

In light of the possibility of questioning the Defendant’s daily life in the rural community, it seems that there was little possibility that the Defendant and the living environment were not detected as a result of the appraisal on whether the Defendant and the living environment had a similar victim L and 0 in a usual manner (Evidence Records 155 pages - 1570 pages - 1570 pages - 2179 pages - 2183 pages).

(7) As such, it is difficult to see the possibility of holding the Defendant’s clothes, etc. on a route other than the Defendant’s criminal process.

8) Concerning the assertion that the victim 0 diversed the part of the victim 0

A) The reasoning of the court below

피고인은 원심에서 피해자 0의 분비물을 휴지로 닦아주었고 흠뻑 젖은 그 휴지를 그 상태로 피고인의 바지 주머니에 넣었으며, 그 상태로 경찰 조사를 받은 후 피고인의 집에 돌아와 버렸다는 취지로 진술하여 그러한 과정에서 피고인의 옷(특히 바지의 주머니 부분 등)과 전동차, 지팡이에 메소밀이 묻었을 가능성을 주장하고 있으나,

(①) 피고인은 수사기관에서는 언급이 없다가 이 법정에서 처음으로 피해자 0의 분비물을 닦아 준 휴지를 바지 주머니에 넣은 후 집에까지 가져와 버렸는데, 구체적으로 어디에 버렸는지는 모르나 변기에 넣고 물을 내렸을 것 같다는 취지로 진술한 점, ② 다른 사람의 입에서 나온 분비물을 닦아 휴지가 흠뻑 젖었음에도 이를 버리지 않고 자신의 바지 주머니에 넣어 둔 채로 있다가 상당한 시간이 흐른 뒤 집에 돌아와서야 이를 버렸다는 것은 이례적으로 보이는 점(피고인은 피해자 0이 구호된 후 마을회관 안으로 들어갔으므로, 마을회관 안에서 충분히 휴지를 버릴 수 있었다), ③ 피해자 0의 분비물을 닦아 주었다면 피고인의 바지 주머니 안에서 메소밀과 피해자 0의 유전자가 함께 검출되어야 함에도 피해자 0의 유전자는 검출되지 않은 점, ④ 피고인은 피해자 이 119 구급차에 실려갈 때까지 계속 피해자 0을 닦아주었고, 피해자 0이 119 구급차에 실려가는 것을 보고 마을회관 안에 들어갔다고 주장하나, 이는 당시 119 구급차가 마을회관에 도착하여 피해자 0을 구조하던 객관적 상황과 일치하지 않는 점 등에 비추어, 피고인의 이 부분 진술도 수긍하기 어렵다.

The victims reported to the effect that X 119 reported on the state of the victim 0's critical condition at the time when the victims were addicted to the smuggling, and that the victim 0 was out of the body from the rail of the front stairs of the community hall, and that it was found that the victim 0 was able to get the front of the community hall, and that there was a food poisoning accident or the defendant who was on the front of the hall, was "I am to go to the front of the community hall". However, the defendant stated to the effect that "I am to go to the front of the community hall," and that "I am to the 0 victim. I am to the effect that there was no speech about the situation within the community hall, and that the victim 0 mixed son was able to know that there was a strong wind.

On the other hand, when the 119 first responds to the arrival of the victim 0, the Defendant 119 first responds to the misunderstanding that there was no other victims as well as the victim in the community center by closing one door of the entrance opened by both parties in the community center, opening up in front of the entrance, opening up the awareness that the victim 0 was lost, and making a day-to-day conversation with AK and AL, which led to the misunderstanding that there was no other victims in the community center.

B) Defense Counsel's assertion

According to the black image of the first 119 first called out, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that the Defendant did not take relief measures on the ground that the first 119 first called out was 0 parts of the victim according to the AK and the AL’s statement that the first 119 first called out and the first 119 first called out was in the presence of the victim when the Defendant moved from the place where 0 was a victim to the community hall, and the situation at the time when the 119 first called out to rescue the victim.

The Defendant, as there was a brush in which the Defendant was fluoring the victim 0 due to the suspension, was fluoring the victim 0 due to the suspension, but did not accurately memory it. On the other hand, the Defendant was able to be forgotten and fluored up to the house, and there is a possibility that the Defendant was fluorized in the house. Therefore, it is not an exceptional.

In addition, with respect to the part where the victim 0 genes was not detected in the Defendant’s main machine, it was not accurate memory that the Defendant placed the suspension as above, and even if it was true, it was not clearly revealed that the cause for the victim 0’s gene was not detected scientifically. Therefore, such determination by the lower court is unreasonable (in particular, the Defendant was suffering from the scene on the day of committing the crime, and was seized on July 17, 2015, which was three days after the date of committing the crime).

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) According to the black image of 119 first called out, around 15:01 on the day of the crime, the victim 0 was placed adjacent to the front line, and the defendant was already going to go to the front line (Evidence Records 295, 1166, 1173, 15:04). At around 15:04, at around 15:04, the defendant continued to go to go to the front line of the door to enter the center (Evidence Records 295, 1257, 1257), and the victim 0.

On the other hand, the defense counsel asserts that the defendant's 119 first-aid vehicles enter the community center when intending to get other people in the community center while nursing the victim 0, and again, the victim 0 is rescued as part of the victim 0.

According to the police statements of 119 first-aid service workers FY, FY found the victim 0 who opened the 119 first-aid service vehicle in front of the electric vehicle, FY found the victim 0 who opened the 119 first-aid service vehicle in front of the electric vehicle, and at this time, he said that the defendant 0 was the victim 0 and is not aware of the 289 second-aid service vehicle (Evidence record). ③ According to the police statements of AK, AL, and X, the defendant was only in front of the electric vehicle or the victim 0 second-aid service vehicle (Evidence record 519-521 of the evidence record, 2652 of the victim), and the defendant appears to have been in the victim's wife.

However, even according to the above statement, the Defendant did not take relief measures against the victim 0. Moreover, it is difficult to understand that the Defendant, who reported the relief site, exchanged the following questions: “AK and AL,” stating, “I am, Eins, Eins, Eins, Eins, Eins, Eins,” and “I am ins, Eins, Eins, Eins, Eins, Eins, Eins,” and the victim 0 was in an emergency situation to 119 first time, and if the Defendant was in a situation where I am in response to the defense counsel’s assertion, I am about the victim 0 and health condition. In addition, it is difficult to understand that the Defendant was in a situation where I am ins, before the arrival of the 119 first time of the defense counsel’s assertion, and the Defendant was in a situation where I am ins, at the time of 16th day of the arrival of the victim, 16th day of the entrance.

(2) 설령 변호인의 주장과 같이 피고인이 평소에 휴지를 바지 주머니에 넣고 다니는 버릇이 있다고 하더라도, 타액으로 흠뻑 젖은 휴지를 버리지 않고 자신의 바지 주미니에 넣어 두었다는 것이나 그 바지를 며칠 동안 그대로 입은 채 일상생활을 하였다는 것은 이해하기 어렵다. 더구나 피고인은 수사기관에서는 휴지를 자신의 바지주머니에 넣어 두었다는 진술을 하지 않다가 원심에서 처음으로 이러한 진술을 하였다(공판기록 1764면 ~ 1766면), 그리고 피고인의 주머니에서 피해자 0의 유전자가 검출되지 않았다는 등의 점에 비추어 보아도 피고인의 위 진술은 믿기 어렵다.

The statement that the defendant was placed in his own main machine is not a leading newspaper, but a statement made by the defendant himself, so it is difficult to regard it as a simple scam based on an incorrect memory, and it appears that the statement was made to have been cut off due to the suspension of the victim's 0's intervention, and that it was oriented to make a vindication or explanation about the process or whereabouts of the suspension (see, e.g., court records 1711 pages).

(3) In addition, the part that the victim 0’s genes was not detected on the part of the Defendant’s barbs, as seen earlier, seems to be considerably low in general and in the case of the main machine, the detection of the human’s genes would be considerably low in terms of external environment, etc. Accordingly, it is supported by the fact that the victim 0 was not placed in the main machine in which the victim 0’s other amount was charged.

9) As to the assertion that relief measures were taken against victims

A) The reasoning of the court below

The Defendant did not report to 119 in order to rescue the other victims for about 50 minutes after the victim was rescued and did not attempt to know about the emergency situation within the community center to other persons (the Defendant asserted to the effect that he/she may file a report using a mobile phone, but the Defendant’s mobile phone number is not much available but all phone numbers are discovered, and the Defendant stated that he/she will divide the phone number when using a mobile phone in this court, and it is difficult to believe it as it is, in light of the fact that the Defendant stated to the effect that he/she will use a cell phone number when using a cell phone in this court).

As to the reasons why the defendant did not request the victims who were in the community center at the time of rescue of the victim 0 and in the latter situation, the defendant argued that the victim 0 reported the victim 119 emergency situation to the other victims who were in the community center and did not request the rescue. However, the defendant's argument that X (the defendant did not talk about the situation within the community center at the time) who did not know of the situation within the community center was expected to make a request for the rescue of the victims within the community center.

또한 피고인은 마을회관 안에 있던 피해자들이 자는 것으로 알고 있어 추가적인 구조요청을 할 수 없었다는 취지로 주장하고 있으나, ① 피해자 이은 피해자 K 다음으로 메소밀이 함유된 사이다를 마셨다고 진술하고 있고, 다른 피해자들도 비슷한 시기에 사이다를 마셨을 것으로 추측할 수 있으므로, 피해자 이 메소밀이 함유된 사이다를 마신 후 증상이 발현된 시점에는 다른 피해자들도 입에서 거품이 나오고 땀이 흠뻑 젖어 있는 등의 같은 증상이 발생했을 가능성이 크다고 보이는 점, ② 피해자 0은 당시 피해자 J, K 등과 함께 감자를 깎은 후 감자를 삶는 동안 화투를 치려고 하였고 자신이 부엌으로 가 깎은 감자를 물에 씻고 있던 상황이라 그동안 다른 피해자들이 모두 누워 잔다는 것은 있을 수 없다는 취지로 진술한 점, ③ 마을회관 안의 피해자들이 발견될 당시 입 주위에 거품이 있는 채로 베게도 없이, 다른 피해자의 발 부위에 머리를 두고 누워 있거나, 틀니까지 빠진 상황이었던 점 등에 비추어, 자는 줄 알았다는 피고인의 주장은 당시의 객관적 상황과는 일치하지 않는 것으로 수긍하기 어렵다.

Furthermore, even according to the defendant's assertion, the defendant's assertion is difficult to accept in light of the fact that the defendant again entered the village center without any request for rescue, in light of the fact that the defendant had no request for rescue until he/she discovered and reported the situation of the victims by entering the village center as well as the situation of the victims.

The Defendant stated that all victims have made efforts to rescue, such as breaking away rains, etc. of all victims. However, CCTV photographs of the 119 first-aid vehicle showed that the Defendant was found to be far away from the victim 0, or left alone, and that X, R andN witnesses in the community center after the victim 0 was rescued, all of them did not regard the Defendant as engaging in relief activities.

B) Defense Counsel's assertion

피해자들이 범행 당일 14:30경 사이다를 나누어 마신 후 피해자 0은 마을회관 부엌 싱크대로 가서 감자를 씻었고 다른 피해자들은 주변을 정리한 후 마을회관 바닥에 누웠으며 피고인도 같이 누웠다. 그로부터 15분 정도가 지난 14:45경 피해자 0이 고통을 호소하며 밖으로 나갔고 피고인도 피해자 0을 따라 나갔다. 당시는 피해자 0의 경우 가장 젊었고 감자를 씻는 등으로 활동하여 혈액순환이 빨랐으므로 가장 먼저 증세가 나타난 것이고 다른 피해자들은 메소밀 중독 증상이 나타나기 전이었다. 피고인의 진술에 의하면 피해자 0이 나가면서 "나만 그래여, 나만 그래여"라고 말했다는 것으로 이를 뒷받침한다(피해자 0은 원심에서 그러한 말을 한 적이 없다고 진술하였으나 당시 피해자 0은 메소밀 중독으로 정신이 없는 상태였음을 감안하면 피고인의 진술이 더 신빙성이 있다).

피고인이 피해자 0을 따라 마을회관 계단 난간으로 갔을 때 마침 그곳을 지나던 X이 피해자 0을 보고 달려왔는데 피고인은 X에게 "이 사람 왜 카겠어, 왜 카겠어"라고 말하였고 X이 피고인에게 피해자 0이 뭘 먹고 이러는지 묻자 피고인은 설마사이다를 먹고 이렇게 되었다고는 생각하지 못하고 "아무것도 안 먹었다."라고 말하였다. 그러자 X은 14:51경 119에 신고를 한 뒤 마을사람들을 부르기 위해 마을회관을 떠났다. 119 구급차가 오는 동안 피고인은 휴지로 피해자 0의 입가 거품을 닦아주었고, 15:01경 119 구급차가 마을회관 안으로 들어왔다. 피고인은 피해자 0의 곁에서 0이 구조되는 장면을 지켜보았고 마을회관 안으로 들어가지 않았으며 15:05경 119 구급차가 피해자 0을 태우고 마을회관을 떠난 뒤 마침 그곳 현장으로 온 AK, AL과 그 할머니인 AF의 안부를 물으며 대화를 나누었고, AK, AL이 떠나자 15:10경 무렵 비로소 마을회관 안으로 들어갔다. 피해자 O에 대한 구조 당시 상황에 관하여, CF은 당시 회관 마당에 피고인이 있었다고 진술하였고, AK와 AL은 당시 피고인이 전동차가 있는 곳에서 있었다고 진술하였는바, 피고인의 진술에 부합한다.

Defendant: (a) thought that other victims were suffering from food poisoning; (b) thought that the victims were suffering from food poisoning; and (c) took out a stop and a scambing out of the victim. They saw that the air within the community hall was scambly scam and out of it, and that the victim was scambling. At 15:40 long, R was in the community hall around 15:43, and it was sent back to the victim hospital by reporting the victims at 119 at around 15:43. The Defendant thought that it was too difficult for them to first report the victims, and that X was already 119, and that they did not know about the fact to the village, and that the Defendant did not know about the fact that it was 15,000,000,000,0000,0000,0000,000,0000,000).

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) We examine the argument that the main addiction symptoms were the highest to 0 victims.

According to the victim's body, ① is more young than other victims, ② the victim's 1950s old, ② the victim's prosecutor's office and court court's testimony was delayed, and the victim's excluding M and the defendant were forced to reduce the reduction of the reduction of the capital, and the other victims and the defendant's scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scamscam scamscam scam scamscam scamscam scamscam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scamscam scam.

The defense counsel cited the fact-finding inquiry report of the pesticide addiction research institute on the ground that the symptoms of the Mesium addiction were rapidly shown to the victim. However, the fact-finding inquiry report only contains that the time when the Mesium symptoms occurred can be found individually, and rather, the degree of addiction may be more severe for the weak person (in the trial record, No. 158, No. 164), and even according to the fact-finding inquiry report, it seems that the symptoms of the Mesium addiction to other victims are more severe than those presumed to be more healthy than those presumed to be presumed to be more severe.

Therefore, the above assertion by the defense counsel is difficult to accept.

(2) We examine the defendant's assertion that it was impossible for the defendant to confirm the situation of other victims because the defendant was out of Korea due to the victim's 0.

(2) According to the victim's prosecutor's office and court court's statements, the victim's reduction of capital including the victim's 0 was not lying towards the victim's death before and after the end of the period, and the victim's life was not locked (Evidence Records 2825 pages 1205~1208 pages, 1257 pages), ③ The victim's investigation report submitted by the prosecutor at the trial court (the other party's record being treated in the emergency room at Daegu BG Hospital), and the victim's body and the other victim's body were not able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to able to be able to able to be able to able to be able to able to able to able to her.

(3) As above, the Defendant appears to have confirmed the abnormal state of other victims at the time when the Defendant went out of the community hall pursuant to the victim 0, but even if it was impossible to confirm, the Defendant was aware of the serious state of the other victims if he went back into the community hall at least.

However, according to R's police statement, after the victim 0 was sent back to the scene of the crime, the victim was contacted by his wife and arrived at the community center and confirmed that the victim was written (Evidence No. 2671 of the record). At the time, the defendant was outside of the community center of mixed children (Evidence No. 2671 of the record), the witness S, T, U's police or prosecutor's office, and the defendant was sitting in or was under the stairs outside of the community center (Evidence No. 2684 of the record, No. 2729, No. 2792 of the record), and there is no difference between R's statement and the victim's statement. In other words, even according to the above statement, the defendant was outside of the community center of mixed children, and there is no other evidence to confirm that the defendant was taking relief measures.

Even if the defense counsel asserts, the defendant's behavior at the time is nothing more than that of the victims before R arrives at the community center. Such behavior of the defendant is too big than that of the general public taking by reporting the status of the victims, such as at the time. The conduct taken by the general public is well known when the behavior taken by the general public was conducted by X, which first appeared to have been observed by the victim's critical condition, and by the R, which first appeared to have been observed by other victims.

In other words, X asked the victim that "Isle. why why why why was the son?" reported to 119 immediately, and the husband knew about the son's house, and then known R's denial S. of R's house (Evidence No. 2651 to 2652 of the record). On the day of committing the crime, R was in the Kim E-M on the day of committing the crime, having been contacted by his father, immediately reported to 119 as a community center, and requested U.S. residents, a village resident, who is a village resident, to help her wife and E, to walk on a telephone (Evidence No. 2719 to 272 of the record).

Considering the circumstances that the defendant was old and somewhat old, it is difficult to understand the above behavior of the defendant.

(4) As to the above defendant's action, the defense counsel asserts that the defendant did not first make a request for rescue and relief, and X already reported to 119 after his mind, and that he knew to the village, and that he did not make a separate request for rescue and relief on the ground that he did not immediately think that the additional 119 ambulances and villagers would come.

In addition, the Defendant was able to take measures, such as reporting the state of other victims to the extent that it could not take relief measures, since the Defendant had previously been in a similar situation with other victims, it appears that he did not play or she did not know about the situation of other victims to the extent that he could not take relief measures. Furthermore, the Defendant was able to take measures, such as reporting the state of victim 0 to X 119, and reporting the cell phone status to X 119.

In this regard, the defense counsel again asserts that the defendant had a cell phone but that the defendant would have reported 119 even though he had a cell phone, it is difficult to understand that the defendant would have reported 119 even after his age, and that X-119 report was observed immediately before the defendant's cell phone, and there was a statement that the defendant would divide the number and send the number directly without using the reduction number (Evidence Records 814 to 818), and it is difficult to accept it as it is, in light of the fact that the defendant stated that he would use the cell phone when he uses a cell phone (Evidence 1726, 1801 of the trial record).

In addition, the defense counsel knew that X had taken measures such as reporting to 119, and did not separately request rescue. This assertion that the defendant was erroneous in the situation where X was old and light. However, it is difficult to understand even considering the defendant's age and the situation at the time of the crime. Furthermore, even according to the defense counsel's assertion, the defendant did not take relief measures for more than 30 minutes until 15:49 (Evidence Record 159 pages) of the same day as the date of the report to 119, since the defendant confirmed that X entered the community center on 15:10 minutes before the crime day and confirmed the status of other victims, it is difficult to think that the defendant did not take such measures for more than 15:19 minutes after the date of the report to 119 (Evidence Record 159 pages).

10) Regarding the part where the defendant correctly identified the cause of the victims to R.

A) The reasoning of the court below

The defendant listened to the case that the victim 0 was injured, and the first time confirmed the site of the village center for the victims, and confirmed the cause of the victims' writing to the head of the village center, and identified the cause of the victims' writing in the village center accurately. (The defendant argued that R was false by denying that R was not made to the victim at the time of the prosecutor's investigation (at the time of the prosecutor's investigation, it was recognized in this court, but it was recognized in this court), and R was reported to the effect that R was heard and used as drinking water and used as drinking water, and the investigative agency could promptly secure sick as a death at the scene of the crime of this case.

B) Defense Counsel's assertion

At the time, the victims had shown the same symptoms, and the victims did not know that they were the same, so that they naturally referred to as "marbriance" to R, and if the defendant was the offender, he could not neglect the above statements.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

The Defendant appears to be a fact recognized by the lower court and the first instance court in regard to the reason why the victims write down to R, and the Defendant may be deemed as a valuable evidence of conviction, such as the lower court’s determination. However, as alleged by the defense counsel, it is also true that there is a question as to whether the Defendant would be the offender, if he/she is a criminal.

However, even though the defendant was mixed with the crypians, it seems that the victims of the crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp, but the cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp.

11) The credibility of the Defendant’s statement

A) Defense Counsel's assertion

Considering the fact that the Defendant is a senior citizen aged 83 years of age, is coming to brain fluor, etc., the Defendant experienced confusion of memory due to various investigations conducted by an investigation agency, and there was a case where there was an obvious denial of factual difference due to the operation of the main defense device, it can be understood that the part of the Defendant’s statement is somewhat inconsistent.

B) Determination of the immediate deliberation

Considering the aforementioned defense counsel’s assertion, it is difficult to understand the Defendant’s statement that is inconsistent or objective evidence as follows, and the Defendant’s attitude following the crime is contrary to the empirical rule, and thus, it is difficult to believe that the Defendant’s appeal that the Defendant did not mixing meines with meines is eventually difficult.

(1) As to the order of arrival at the community center on the day of committing the crime, the Defendant stated that he/she arrived after the victim J, N, K, L, or M (Evidence Nos. 199, 365). However, as seen earlier, it is inconsistent with the objective facts revealed by the victim’s prosecutor’s statement (Evidence No. 282 of the Evidence No. 282 of the Evidence No. 282).

(2) The Defendant stated that at the time of the first investigation at the AV box on the day of the crime, the Defendant was unable to view that he was dead at the cooling box (Evidence No. 8), and thereafter at the police station and the prosecution, the Defendant changed the victim M’s statement (Evidence No. 57, No. 1377), and reversed the previous statement on the ground that he was well-known (Evidence No. 1749). In addition, the lower court reversed the previous statement on the ground that M was the fact that the victim was dead (Evidence No. 1697 of the trial record);

(3) The Defendant stated in the police that the victim 0 was the same as the other victims (Evidence No. 200 pages), which is contrary to the victim 0's prosecutorial statement (Evidence No. 2825 pages) that the victim 0 got out of a cleaning agent and got out of the symptoms of Mesium addiction as seen earlier.

(4) The Defendant stated at the prosecution that he did not talk with AK and AL (Evidence No. 1696 of the Evidence Record), which is in conflict with AK and AL’s police statement (Evidence No. 521 of the Evidence No. 521 to 522, No. 1257 to 1258 of the Evidence No. 522).

(5) The police officers AJ and AI called at the site of R, T and, at the time, the police officers or the prosecution made a statement to the effect that the victims were dead (Evidence Records 597 pages, 1498 pages, 1505 pages, 2720 pages, 2729 pages, 2729) and AJ made a statement to the effect that the victims were dead (Evidence Records 597 pages, 1505 pages, 2729 pages, 2729), and the Defendant stated to the same effect in the work pocket book (Evidence Records 504 pages), that the Defendant did not make such remarks at the prosecutor’s office and that police officers and village residents were making a false statement (Evidence Records 1697 pages, 1701 pages, 1701),

(6) The Defendant stated in the prosecutor’s office that there was no fact that he did not go out of the house even though the front CCTV was taken in around 13:09 on the day of the crime (Evidence Record 1369 pages).

(7) When a police officer discovered the instant gamsy soldier in the Defendant’s office, the Defendant told that “A police officer was a military police officer, and a large amount of soil was asked” despite having not asked the Defendant any question, and not directly shown (Evidence No. 202-203, No. 373). This seems to have been due to the police officer’s knowledge that the Defendant had significant meaning and status of the instant gams soldier.

(8) After committing the crime, the Defendant did not contact with the victims (Evidence Nos. 1451 of the Evidence Nos. 1451) and appears to be unable to use another person’s well-being in the circumstance where the Defendant is suspected of committing an offense. However, it seems that the Defendant did not have any problem in health because he/she was not dead if he/she was an ordinary person.

(9) It seems to be a general reason to appeal against other persons if a person is in prison name and is confined in prison. However, it seems that the Defendant did not ask questions as to whether a person was forced to commit a crime by force or by force to the family who was confined in prison due to the instant case (Evidence Records 1852 pages - 1856 pages).

The Defendant, even in the trial of the political party, only made a fluence that he did not speak, except the reply to the recognized newspaper by the presiding judge, while the date of trial and the date of trial are in progress. This is difficult to view it as the attitude of a person who was sentenced to imprisonment for life in the trial of the lower court while making a fluencing name and being confined to prisons.

12) Sub-committee

As above, the defendant and his defense counsel raise a different possibility that the defendant may not be the criminal with regard to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor. Among them, there are arguments that the defendant can not be the criminal with regard to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor. However, most of the other possibilities so raised are not in compliance with the ordinary common sense and the empirical rule, but are not in harmony with the objective facts revealed scientifically.

If there is only one or several evidence that the defendant is an offender, for example, the company of this case, which was closed at a lid lid, is the company of this case, and there is no sufficient lid from the defendant's house pool lids, and if there is no sufficient lids found in the defendant's house lids of this case, it is difficult to view that there was proof of the facts charged of this case as long as there is no possibility that the defendant would not be an offender, but there is no reasonable doubt.

However, as seen above, there is a lot of evidence suggesting that the defendant is the defendant in this case. One of the evidence is somewhat insufficient to conclude that the defendant is the criminal, but there is no lack of sufficient evidence to regard the defendant as the criminal when he/she collected the evidence.

D. As to sentencing

In this case, we examine whether the defendant and his defense counsel did not claim as the grounds for appeal, but the court below's sentence sentencing imprisonment for life is appropriate.

The Defendant appears to have lived with her husband and her children on behalf of her husband and her children, such as her husband and her children, who have lived in the future for more than 80 years. In line with her expectations, the Defendant has been living as an important member of this society by overcoming not only her husband and her awareness, but also her own consciousness. In the instant crime, the Defendant appears to have been living without any big string with neighbors. In the instant crime, the Defendant did not deem that her had a conclusive intention to kill her victims without having the personality of mast, or that she had been living at the pleasure of pleasure that he/she had been successful in the police station even after her murdering the victims. This is true in light of the overall record and the Defendant’s form and attitude at the trial.

However, the result of the Defendant’s act is too serious and significant, and the Defendant denies the Defendant’s act of committing the crime of sacrine. The bereaved family members of the victims who died due to the instant case appear to have suffered a big pain to the extent that they could not have been sentenced to punishment by speech, and this is the same as the victims and their families living in South and North Korea. The victims and their families living in the instant case are the victims and their families. The neighbors have collapseed to the extent that they are unable to exercise the right of sacrine and have failed to recover until now. Nevertheless, the Defendant did not make any effort to recover damage.

The court below sentenced a life imprisonment to the defendant, and there is a doubt as to whether the defendant is 83 years of age as of the date of the sentencing in this case and when considering the average life expectancy of the defendant, the defendant's sentence of life imprisonment is meaningful or not. However, considering the following circumstances as a whole, the court below comprehensively takes into account all the circumstances, such as character and conduct of the defendant, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, as well as the circumstances after the crime, and the fact that the court below accepted the jury's opinion and rendered life imprisonment and there is no change in circumstances as to the terms and conditions of sentencing in the trial, the sentence imposed on the defendant is determined to be within the appropriate range of sentence corresponding to its responsibility, and the sentence is too unreasonable.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.