beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant, on the date and time indicated in the instant facts charged, entered the surface of the body of “D private letter” in which the victim was the victim. However, there is no fact that the Defendant stolen the body of the victim by opening the clothes of the victim as one of the keys after the time limit in shift from the key to the clothes of the victim.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.
B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) Determination of the credibility of a confession of the relevant legal doctrine should be made by taking into account all the circumstances, including whether the content of the confession statement itself is objectively reasonable, what is the motive or reason for the confession, what is the circumstance leading to the confession, and what is the circumstance other than the confession, and whether there is any conflict or inconsistency with the confession among the circumstantial evidence other than the confession.
B. In a case where a defendant consistently led to his/her confession from the investigative agency to the trial date, and reversed his/her own confession from the trial date, in addition to examining the credibility of his/her confession statement, it is necessary to examine the motive, reason, and circumstances leading to the reversal of his/her confession, together with the motive, reason, and circumstances leading to the reversal of his/her confession, as well as the contents of his/her statement (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do17869, Oct. 13, 2016). In addition, evidence supporting the confession is sufficient if it is limited to the extent that it can be recognized that the confession of the defendant is not a processed one, even if it is not a degree to recognize all or important part of the facts constituting the crime, and even if it is recognized that the confession of the defendant is not a processed one, indirect evidence or circumstantial evidence, which is not a direct evidence, can be reinforced, and evidence is also sufficient as a whole for confession and reinforcement.