Evidence of the written statement prepared by the prosecutor on the witness whose location is unknown;

If a writ of summons for a witness is impossible to be served and the location of the witness cannot be confirmed even by the request for detection of his/her location, it shall be deemed that the written statement of the prosecutor's protocol was made under particularly reliable circumstances, and it shall be deemed that it was made under a particularly reliable condition, and it shall not be deemed that it was erroneous to regard

Article 312(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant 1 and one other

Defendants

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 89No5565 delivered on November 29, 1989

All appeals are dismissed.

The number of detention days after an appeal shall be included in each original sentence by 80 days.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

As to Defendant 1’s ground of appeal

In light of the records, the fact-finding of the court below with respect to Defendant 1 is acceptable, and the fact-finding of the court below's decision 1 does not violate the rules of evidence, and it is not recognized that the protocol of examination of the suspect prepared by the public prosecutor with respect to Defendant 1 was unilaterally prepared and forcibly, and therefore, it is not recognized

Therefore, we cannot accept the argument of the theory of a suit pointing out the fact-finding of the court below, and the arguments are groundless.

As to Defendant 2’s ground of appeal

In addition to the evidence cited by the judgment of the court of first instance as cited by the court below, the facts-finding of Defendant 2 are also acceptable, and the records show that a writ of summons for the consideration of the witness of the court of first instance constitutes a case where it is impossible to serve and its location is not verifiable even if it is requested to detect the location, and thus his statement cannot be heard. The court below deemed that the protocol of the prosecutor's preparation was made under particularly reliable circumstances, and thus, it cannot be said that it was erroneous, and the contents of the protocol cannot be said to have no credibility like the theory of lawsuit, and therefore there is no violation of the rules of evidence in the deliberation of the court of first instance and the fact-finding.

There is no reason to see the court below's misunderstanding the evidence preparation and fact-finding, which is the exclusive authority.

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

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)