The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal on admissibility of the suspect examination protocol prepared by the prosecutor

A. In order to realize the principle of due process stipulated in Article 12(1) of the Constitution and the right to a fair trial guaranteed under Article 27 of the Constitution, the Criminal Procedure Act is based on the trial-oriented principle, oral argument principle, and direct trial principle.

Therefore, in the case that the Criminal Procedure Act satisfies certain requirements with respect to the written evidence, such as the protocol prepared by the investigative agency, the admissibility of evidence is exceptionally permitted in consideration of the ideology of discovery of substantive truth and the request for the economy of litigation. Therefore, the provisions on the requirements for admissibility of evidence should be interpreted and applied strictly

Article 312(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides, “A protocol in which a prosecutor makes a statement of a criminal suspect who is the criminal defendant, shall be admissible as evidence, only when it is acknowledged by the criminal defendant’s statement at a preparatory hearing or during a public trial that the protocol was prepared in accordance with due process and method and contains the same contents as the criminal defendant stated, and it is proved that the statement recorded in the protocol was made in a particularly reliable state, may be admitted as evidence,” and Article 312(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides, “The substantial authenticity is recognized only by the criminal defendant’s statement at a preparatory hearing or during public trial

However, it is proved by a video product or any other objective means that where the defendant denies the authenticity of the formation of the protocol, the statement recorded in the protocol is the same as the defendant stated, and the statement recorded in the protocol was made in a particularly reliable state.