beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case related to D and E in collusion with D and E, and found him guilty of all of the charges of this case including the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation).
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the above measures of the court below are not somewhat inappropriate in its reasoning in relation to the crime of breach of trust, but all of them are acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors of misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of breach of trust, violation of the law of logic and experience and the principle of free evaluation of evidence beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation, or violation of the Constitution and relevant laws on the crime of embezzlement, the crime of breach of trust
2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court’s determination that the investigation procedure and prosecution of the instant case were unlawful on the grounds indicated
It is just to reject all the Defendant’s argument that the Defendant’s constitutional right and defense was infringed in the instant litigation procedure. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in violation of the Constitution and relevant statutes or by misapprehending the relevant legal principles on due process principles, the principle of no punishment or the principle of no prosecution, the principle of exclusion of illegally collected evidence
3. The lower court has properly conducted factual relations that serve as the basis for sentencing.