For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendant on the ground that there is no proof of crime regarding the facts charged of this case.

In light of the record, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding a person delegated with the handling of affairs involving the money entrusted with the purpose and purpose of embezzlement, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, or by misapprehending the rules of evidence.

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