T This research analyzes the legal reasoning in the surabaya district court decision number 454/pid.b/2024/pn.sby, which granted an acquittal in a case concerning a victim\\\'s death. through a normative-juridical approach, this study examines the conformity of the panel of judges\\\' assessment of evidence with the standards of the criminal procedure code. the findings reveal a judicial error where the judges evaluated the evidence separately (partially) and ignored the principle of comprehensive proof (cumulative evidence). the judges improperly disregarded the fact of medical certainty (visum et repertum) solely by relying on cctv footage that was obstructed by a blind spot. furthermore, the defendant\\\'s action of bringing the victim to the hospital after the incident was erroneously interpreted as a reason to negate malicious intent (mens rea). in conclusion, this acquittal stems from irrational doubt resulting from the judges\\\' failure to connect objective facts, thus qualifying it as a decision that is insufficiently reasoned (onvoldoende gemotiverd).