아동복지법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding the facts) is that the budget item for the expenditure of the expenses for the house operation of children under the Infant Care Act is classified as meal expenses and personnel expenses and has strict accounting standards.
However, the defendant submitted a false document as if he received a large number of food materials from food service suppliers, and received a cash refund of the difference between the amount actually purchased from food service suppliers, and the defendant did not indicate that he used the above money for children.
In addition, the defendant prepared a contract as if I were to work full-time as a dietitian and paid I wages, but I did not work as a dietitian.
Thus, the defendant used the operating expenses of child-care centers, which are money and valuables donated or paid for children as stated in the facts charged, for the purpose other than its original purpose, but the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts, which affected
2. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the instant facts charged, while sufficiently explaining the grounds for the determination.
Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the record, the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor was proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the facts charged of this case.
Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion that the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous as a matter of fact is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.