1. On the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court affirmed the first instance judgment which acquitted the Defendants on the ground that there was no proof of crime regarding the part concerning occupational breach of trust among the instant facts charged, and acquitted the Defendants on the ground that the statute of limitations has expired on the part concerning the breach of trust included therein.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the record, 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 “business” in the crime

The Prosecutor appealed the entire judgment of the court below, but did not state specific grounds for objection in the petition of appeal or the appellate brief concerning the guilty portion.

2. On the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court found Defendant A guilty of each part of the instant facts charged concerning Defendant A’s occupational embezzlement.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, and did not err 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 “business”, “entrusted relation” and “the identity of another person” in the crime of occupational embezzlement, or by omitting judgment, which affected the conclusion

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