Supreme Court: "Second Trial Changing First Trial Verdict Document Not Allowed"

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] The Supreme Court has ruled that when a higher court issues a "correction decision" to rectify errors in a previously rendered lower court judgment, it should not substantially alter the content of the judgment. The scope of correction under the Criminal Procedure Act is limited to rectifying errors such as miscalculations or clerical mistakes.

On the 11th, the Supreme Court's Second Division (Presiding Justice No Jeonghee) announced that in the appeal trial of Mr. A, who was indicted for perjury during a trial, it would remand the case without ruling on the grounds of appeal.

In 2016, Mr. A was riding in a taxi with his colleague Mr. B when a dispute arose with the driver over the route. During this incident, Mr. B was indicted for assaulting the taxi driver. However, Mr. A appeared as a witness in Mr. B's trial and falsely testified, in response to questions from both the defense attorney and the prosecutor, that there was "no assault or physical contact."

The first trial court sentenced Mr. A to six months in prison with a one-year probation. The court found all of Mr. A's answers to the defense attorney's and prosecutor's questions to be false testimony and convicted him.

The second trial court upheld the original sentence. However, it found Mr. A guilty only for his testimony in response to the prosecutor's questions and acquitted him for his testimony in response to the defense attorney's questions. It then partially deleted some criminal facts and added reasons for acquittal on those parts, thereby correcting the original judgment.

However, the Supreme Court remanded the case. The court pointed out, "Deleting some criminal facts related to certain testimonies in the reasoning of the first trial judgment and adding reasons for acquittal constitutes a substantial change to the content of an already rendered judgment," and "This exceeds the scope of correction and is therefore not permitted." It further stated, "If the correction decision is recorded only in the reasoning of the judgment and not in the order, it cannot be considered a correction decision," and ruled that "the second trial's judgment, which accepted the defendant's 'grounds for appeal' in the reasoning but recorded 'dismissal of the appeal' in the order, creates a contradiction between the reasoning and the order of the judgment."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.