Acquittal in the Second Instance

An acquittal rendered in an appellate trial after a defendant or prosecutor appeals a guilty verdict from the first instance, reflecting the full application of the presumption of innocence and the pr

Acquittal in the Second Instance

Overview

Acquittal in the second instance (2심 무죄) refers to a court rendering a not-guilty verdict in an appellate trial (the second instance) after the defendant or the prosecutor appealed a case in which the first instance (the first trial) had pronounced a guilty verdict in a criminal trial. This means that the appellate court, upon reexamining the first instance's findings of fact and legal determinations, concluded that the proof of the crime did not reach a level sufficient to exclude reasonable doubt. An acquittal in the second instance carries great legal and social significance in that it represents the ultimate vindication of the presumption of innocence and the principle of trial based on evidence.

Key Content

Concept and Legal Basis

The Criminal Procedure Act guarantees the right to appeal in a direction favorable to the defendant, and the appellate court reexamines the propriety of the original judgment's findings of fact and application of law. When the appellate court overturns the original court's guilty finding, it pronounces an acquittal on the ground that the proof of the criminal facts was insufficient. Because the constitutional presumption of innocence, the principle of trial based on evidence under the Criminal Procedure Act, and the principle of free evaluation of evidence apply equally in the appellate trial, even a case found guilty in the first instance may result in an acquittal in the second instance if the admissibility of evidence is denied or its probative value is diminished.

Structure of the Second Instance (Appellate Trial)

The appellate trial basically performs the same fact-finding function as the first instance, but the scope of adjudication is limited to the matters asserted by the defendant as grounds for appeal and to matters the court may examine ex officio. In the appellate trial, new evidence not submitted in the first instance may be additionally admitted, and witnesses may be examined again. For this reason, there are many cases in which the credibility of statements used as key evidence of guilt in the first instance is reconsidered in the appellate trial and the conclusion is overturned.

Types of Acquittal

Acquittals in the second instance are broadly divided into full acquittal and partial acquittal. A full acquittal is a case in which the court finds no proof of a crime as to all of the facts charged, while a partial acquittal is a case in which only part of the facts charged is found guilty and the remainder is found not guilty. In addition, a distinction is drawn between a pure acquittal corresponding to "when there is no proof of a crime" and an acquittal on legal grounds such as "when the act does not constitute a crime or the punishment has been abolished," and this distinction affects subsequent procedures such as whether criminal compensation may be claimed.

Effect of an Acquittal Judgment

When an acquittal is pronounced in the second instance, the original court's guilty judgment loses effect. However, if the prosecutor appeals to the Supreme Court within the appeal period, the judgment is not yet final and becomes subject to the Supreme Court's determination. If the prosecutor does not appeal or the appeal is dismissed, the acquittal becomes final, and the defendant may claim compensation corresponding to the number of days of detention under the Criminal Compensation Act. In addition, a final acquittal serves as grounds for a retrial and holds important significance in other subsequent cases.

Prosecutor's Appeal and Legal Stability

The prosecutor may appeal an acquittal to the Supreme Court, in which case the Supreme Court, if it finds grounds such as misunderstanding of law or insufficient examination, reverses the original judgment and remands the case to the appellate court. The conclusion may change once again during the rehearing in the appellate court after remand. For this reason, it often takes a long time for an acquittal to become final, and the tension between the promptness of trials and legal stability is pointed out as a problem.

Practical and Social Significance

An acquittal in the second instance is an example showing that both the investigative authorities' investigation results and the first instance's judgment can be wrong, and it symbolizes the independence of the judiciary and the prudence of fact-finding. At the same time, it provides the defendant with an opportunity to restore honor and return to society, but it also entails social and economic costs from the lengthy trial. In cases drawing great media and public attention, the acquittal in the second instance itself may trigger social controversy.

Recent Trends

As of 2024–2025, the appellate acquittal rate is an indicator that consistently draws attention. According to the Supreme Court's Judicial Yearbook, the rate at which original judgments are reversed in appellate trials remains at a certain level, and a considerable portion of these reversals lead to acquittals or partial acquittals. Recently, the admissibility of digital evidence, the scope of application of the doctrine excluding illegally collected evidence, and the criteria for assessing the credibility of victims' statements have emerged as major issues that overturn appellate conclusions. In addition, under the expansion of citizen participation trials and the strengthened emphasis on court-centered proceedings, there are an increasing number of cases in which the first instance's method of examining evidence is called into question in the appellate trial. Along with criticism of the prosecution's practice of excessive appeals to the Supreme Court, legislative discussions on restricting the grounds for such appeals continue, and voices calling for enhancing the effectiveness of the criminal compensation system are also growing.