Whether the confession of the defendant under Article 310 of the Criminal Procedure Act includes the confession of the co-defendant.

Since the confession of the defendant under Article 310 of the Criminal Procedure Act does not include the statement of the co-defendant, the statement of co-defendant can be used as evidence in recognizing the facts constituting the crime against the other co-defendant.

Article 310 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 85Do951 Decided July 9, 1985

Defendant 1 and one other

Defendants

Attorneys Kim Jong-he (Presiding over the defendants)

Seoul High Court Decision 86No1541 delivered on July 25, 1986

All appeals are dismissed.

The number of detention days after an appeal shall be included in the calculation of the original sentence by 30 days.

The Defendants and the state appointed defense counsel's grounds of appeal are examined together.

The court below found the defendants guilty of all charges including the crime No. 1-A and No. 310 of the judgment of the court below based on the evidence at the time of the crime. In light of the records, the court below's aforementioned measures can be justified and it cannot be said that there is any error in law by incomplete deliberation or violating the rules of evidence. Among them, each protocol of examination of the defendants as to the defendants prepared by the public prosecutor was acknowledged in the court of the first instance, and it cannot be viewed as false confession in the psychological pressure of adviser or coercion, and there is no ground to view it as evidence or credibility (each protocol of examination of the defendants as to the preparation of crime by judicial police officer is not admitted as evidence of guilt). Further, since the confession of the defendant under Article 310 of the Criminal Procedure Act does not include the statements of the co-defendant as co-defendant, the defendant's confession as co-defendant, and the defendant's statements as co-defendant cannot be admitted as evidence, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the defendant's confession or evidence as to the defendant's evidence.

In the end, all arguments are groundless.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and part of the detention days after the appeal is included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)