beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part against Defendant A and the part against Defendant D shall be reversed, respectively.
Defendant
A.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Prosecutor (Defendant A) was convicted of other crimes committed by the same method at the time adjacent to the crimes indicated in this part of the facts charged, and at the time, Defendant A was convicted of other crimes committed by the same method. At the time, Defendant A was the EF district of the Victim Association (hereinafter “Association”).
In light of the fact that he was the president of the Republic of Korea, the fact that only the Defendant did not have been aware of and participated in the crime in this part is against the empirical rule that the Defendant was aware that he committed the crime as stated in this part of the facts charged. Therefore, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts. 2) The sentence of the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing (the fine of KRW 10,00,000) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant A1) M&D (the part on occupational breach of trust around May 3, 2013 and the part on occupational breach of trust around May 13, 2013) filed a public prosecution against Defendant A on or around June 10, 2013 with the original Daejeon District Court 2016Kadan4008, and did not institute a public prosecution against occupational breach of trust on or around May 3, 2013. However, the court below applied for a public prosecutor’s amendment of the indictment to add the above charges on occupational breach of trust during the trial of the court below. However, the public prosecutor’s first charge (the occupational breach of trust around June 10, 2013) and the additional charges on occupational breach of trust (the additional charges on occupational breach of trust and the amendment of the indictment on May 13, 2013). Accordingly, the court below accepted the prosecutor’s amendment of the indictment, not the additional charges on occupational breach of trust, but the additional charges on the amendment of the indictment.