근로기준법위반등
All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.
1. The subject matter of adjudication of the appellate court may be subject to adjudication only when it is stated in the petition of appeal or is included in the statement of reason for appeal submitted within the prescribed period, and even if matters not included in the statement of reason for appeal are stated in the statement of reasons for appeal in the appellate court, there are reasons for appeal, such as arguments contained in the statement
We cannot see (Supreme Court Decision 98Do1234 delivered on September 22, 1998). The judgment of the court below of this case was pronounced on November 17, 2015, and on November 24, 2015, Defendant A asserted that Defendant C was not guilty of the part of the judgment of the court below 2015 senior 809 (the point of fraud) among the judgment of the court below, and Defendant B asserted that he was not guilty of the part of 2015 senior 809 (the point of fraud) among the judgment of the court below and 2015 senior 253 (the point of payment of wages and retirement allowances of KK) among the judgment of the court below, and filed each appeal.
Defendant
A On December 21, 2015, Defendant B and C received the notice of receipt of the relevant records of trial on December 18, 2015. On January 15, 2016, the above Defendant submitted a statement of reasons for appeal stating the purport that each fact mistake, misunderstanding of legal principles, and unfair sentencing are subject to an appeal.
As above, since the defendants' grounds for appeal are submitted when the period stipulated in Article 361-3 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act elapses from the date the receipt of each court record is received, the reasons for appeal specified in the reasons for appeal shall not be subject to adjudication, but it shall be included in the object of adjudication to the extent that it supplements the reasons for appeal in each petition of appeal.
Therefore, as to Defendant B, the lower court determined the mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of sentencing with respect to the part of the 2015 High Court Decision 2015 High Court Decision 253 High Court Decision, and as to Defendant C, the lower court determined the mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of sentencing with respect
Defendant
In the case of A, it is necessary to judge only unfair sentencing, but in the case of 2015 senior 809 senior group, the defendant C, who is an accomplice, is erroneous.