2015Do14232 A. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement)

(b) Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes

A person shall be appointed.

Defendant

Law Firm (LLC) E

Attorney F, G

Law Firm GU

Attorney GV, GW, GX

Seoul High Court Decision 2014No688 decided August 21, 2015

April 15, 2016

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 through 5

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, it is justifiable to have determined that the lower court convicted the Defendant of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence inconsistent with logical and empirical rules, by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by misapprehending

2. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 6 and 7

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules

3. Conclusion

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

Justices Park Poe-young

Justices Park Byung-hee

Justices Kim Jae-han

Justices Kwon Soon-il