1. On the grounds of appeal by the public prosecutor, the lower court acquitted the public prosecutor on the ground that there was no proof of crime regarding the part concerning occupational embezzlement listed in [Attachment 1] Nos. 2 through 18 of the crime list as indicated in the judgment of the lower

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of occupational embezzlement

2. On the grounds of appeal by the Defendant, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the part of occupational embezzlement and the part of the building subsidence as stated in the attached Table 2 Nos. 1 through 4 of the crime committed in the judgment of the lower court among

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intent of unlawful acquisition, establishment of a structure intrusion in the crime of occupational embezzlement, and legitimate act.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.