The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of all of the embezzlement charges of this case (except for the part without charge) on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, it did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as alleged in the grounds of appeal by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “a person who keeps another’s property” and “an intention to acquire another’s property” in embezzlement.

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