-
About DAEON
-
Our Team
-
Practice Areas
-
Case Results
-
Resources
-
Contact Us
Back
Supreme Court Decision 2024Do2200, March 13, 2025 [Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) · Fraud]
〈Case concerning the measures to be taken by the appellate court where the indictment was amended at the appellate stage〉
【Holding】
The measures to be taken by the appellate court where the prosecutor, at the appellate stage, amends the indictment with the court's permission to the extent that the identity of the charged facts is not impaired, and the charged facts are thereby changed or the subject matter of adjudication differs from that of the first instance / Where the amendment of the indictment at the appellate stage merely corrects a simple clerical error or supplements or explains in detail the content of the existing charged facts, such that the subject matter of adjudication at the appellate stage cannot be evaluated as having substantially changed from that of the first instance, whether the appellate court must necessarily reverse the first-instance judgment ex officio (negative)
【Summary of Decision】
Where the prosecutor, at the appellate stage, amends the indictment with the court's permission to the extent that the identity of the charged facts is not impaired, and as a result the charged facts are changed or the subject matter of adjudication differs from that of the first instance, the appellate court must reverse the first-instance judgment and newly examine and rule on the amended charged facts. However, if, in light of the content and purport of the arguments of the defendant or defense counsel and the progress of the proceedings, the amendment of the indictment at the appellate stage merely corrects a simple clerical error or supplements or explains in detail the content of the existing charged facts, such that the subject matter of adjudication at the appellate stage cannot be evaluated as having substantially changed from that of the first instance, the appellate court need not necessarily reverse the first-instance judgment ex officio merely because the procedure for amending the indictment was undertaken.
【Referenced Statutes】
Article 298(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act
【Referenced Precedents】
Supreme Court Decision 2017Do14879, December 22, 2017
(Source: Supreme Court Decision 2024Do2200, March 13, 2025 | Judicial Information Disclosure Portal, Precedents)
【Holding】
The measures to be taken by the appellate court where the prosecutor, at the appellate stage, amends the indictment with the court's permission to the extent that the identity of the charged facts is not impaired, and the charged facts are thereby changed or the subject matter of adjudication differs from that of the first instance / Where the amendment of the indictment at the appellate stage merely corrects a simple clerical error or supplements or explains in detail the content of the existing charged facts, such that the subject matter of adjudication at the appellate stage cannot be evaluated as having substantially changed from that of the first instance, whether the appellate court must necessarily reverse the first-instance judgment ex officio (negative)
【Summary of Decision】
Where the prosecutor, at the appellate stage, amends the indictment with the court's permission to the extent that the identity of the charged facts is not impaired, and as a result the charged facts are changed or the subject matter of adjudication differs from that of the first instance, the appellate court must reverse the first-instance judgment and newly examine and rule on the amended charged facts. However, if, in light of the content and purport of the arguments of the defendant or defense counsel and the progress of the proceedings, the amendment of the indictment at the appellate stage merely corrects a simple clerical error or supplements or explains in detail the content of the existing charged facts, such that the subject matter of adjudication at the appellate stage cannot be evaluated as having substantially changed from that of the first instance, the appellate court need not necessarily reverse the first-instance judgment ex officio merely because the procedure for amending the indictment was undertaken.
【Referenced Statutes】
Article 298(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act
【Referenced Precedents】
Supreme Court Decision 2017Do14879, December 22, 2017
(Source: Supreme Court Decision 2024Do2200, March 13, 2025 | Judicial Information Disclosure Portal, Precedents)