The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below rejected the defendant's statement or written statement on the ground that there was no illegal confinement or harsh treatment against the defendant, and that the prosecutor's investigation was conducted in a voluntary state even if the defendant's non-voluntary state of trial was continued until the prosecutor's investigation stage, but the confession on the date of trial was made in a voluntary state. The court below rejected the admissibility of evidence on the ground that although E, G, J, L, and N had already been dead, the written statement or written statement on these were admissible as evidence, it was not admitted as evidence, and the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged.

2. The lower court’s determination 1 of the lower court: (a) The interrogation protocol and written statement, etc., at the police stage of the Defendant against the Defendant were used as evidence to the effect that the Defendant denies or denies its content in the court; and (b) the interrogation protocol, etc., at the prosecution stage of the Defendant at the prosecution stage, were made after cruel acts, such as adviser, etc., without a warrant of detention, and there is no prosecutor’s proof that there is reasonable and sufficient reason to suspect the voluntariness; and (c) there is no evidence of the prosecutor’s proof that there is no consent to use as evidence by the Defendant, and there is no evidence of each written statement, E, G, H, K, L, M, M, N, and P, and there is no evidence of the prosecutor’s voluntariness; and (d) there is no sufficient reason to suspect that the written statement was made in the state of voluntary appearance without the warrant of detention, but there is no evidence of the prosecutor’s voluntariness.