Enlarging an image
The Supreme Court has ruled that the state must compensate if the prosecutor has secured evidence in favor of the accused and has not presented it to the trial in time.
Today (19th), the first division of the Supreme Court (Chief Judge Roh Tae-ak) announced that it had confirmed the lower court ruling that the state should pay 3 million won to Mr. A, who was found not guilty.
On the morning of October 30, 2015, Mr. A was handed over to trial on charges of sexually assaulting his acquaintance B, who slept on sleeping pills, without permission.
Mr. A, who was in a drunken state at the time, claimed "I do not remember anything", but the prosecution took him to trial by combining the fact that Mr. A woke up in the victim's room in underwear and the victim's statement.
On the other hand, the victim also admitted that 'the memory is not clear because he was sleeping on the sleeping pill'.
Later, in the course of the police investigation, the National Forensic Research Institute's analysis result was secured that the gene of Mr. A was not detected in the victim's body, but the prosecution did not include the appraisal in the evidence list of the first trial.
At the request of Mr. A, who became aware of the fact, an appraisal of the National Forensic Service was submitted to the first trial court, and Mr. A was acquitted of sexual assault.
Mr. A filed a lawsuit against the state, saying, "I suffered mental damage due to the prosecutor's mistake."
In response, both the first and second instances said, "The prosecutor is responsible for not fulfilling the duty to present evidence."
The Supreme Court also found that the lower court's decision was correct.
The court said, "The appraisal that Mr. A's gene was not detected is material that has a decisive influence on Plaintiff A's confession, denial, and exercise of his right to defend. We have a duty not only to defend the defendant's legitimate interests in the process, but also to defend the defendant's legitimate interests in the process."
Regarding this ruling, a Supreme Court official said, "Confirming the jurisprudence of the previous Supreme Court precedent that a prosecutor has an obligation to submit evidence when a prosecutor has secured evidence favorable to the defendant, a verdict," he said.
On the other hand, Mr. A also asked the victim for responsibility for the false accusation and requested compensation for damages, but the court dismissed Mr. A's claim, saying, "From the perspective of the victim who could not remember exactly the situation by taking sleeping pills, he could think that he was sexually assaulted based on the circumstances." I did.
(Photo = Yonhap News, Yonhap News TV)