All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

The court below dismissed the prosecution as to the violation of the Labor Standards Act among the facts charged in this case, and convicted the remainder of the facts charged, and the defendant and the prosecutor appealed only to the conviction.

The judgment below

Since the dismissal of public prosecution is separated from the failure of both parties to appeal, the scope of inquiry of this court shall be limited to the conviction of the original judgment.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

According to the indictment in the case of this case, the specific circumstance of 'I Q79' and 7 years and 8 months of social capacity is merely the fact of quasi-Fraud (S Q55)' was stated in the facts charged in the indictment of this case. In addition, it is not stipulated in the law, and it is also stated that the reason to cause the court's prejudice is written in violation of the principle of an indictment only.

Therefore, even though the prosecution procedure on this part is null and void in violation of the provisions of the law, and thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the Japanese principle of indictment.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

In light of the type and contents of the crime as stated in the facts charged, whether the method of indictment violates the principle of an indictment only or not shall be determined specifically in the case in question on the basis of the contents of the documents or other articles attached or quoted in the indictment, and whether the facts recorded in the indictment other than those required by the law may hinder the judge or jury from understanding the substance of the crime.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2009Do7436 Decided October 22, 2009). The lower court’s judgment is based on quasi-Fraud by the prosecutor.