1. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the part concerning occupational embezzlement and aiding and abetting occupational embezzlement in relation to the name of P wage among the instant facts charged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court did not err in its judgment by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intent of aiding and abetting the accomplice’s subordinate performance in the crime of embezzlement in the course of occupational embezzlement

2. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds that there was no proof of crime regarding the forgery of private documents, the exercise of a falsified investigation document, the false entry of the original copy of a process deed, and the exercise of the original copy of a process deed, among the instant facts charged.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower judgment did not err by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

The Prosecutor appealed on the guilty portion and the remaining not guilty portion of the judgment below, but did not state the grounds for appeal on the petition of appeal, and did not state the grounds for appeal on the petition of appeal.

3. The final appeal by the Defendant and the Prosecutor is dismissed in entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.