logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.01.12 2016노2300
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the charge of Defendant A’s violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint attack) on February 28, 2012. The part of the Defendants’ appeal only against the conviction and the part of the Defendant’s failure to appeal against the prosecutor is finalized. Of the Defendants’ violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement), the part other than the facts charged in the lower judgment, which the lower court found the Defendants guilty, was acquitted on the grounds of the lower judgment, and the prosecutor did not appeal against it and was exempted from the object of public defense

As to this part, the conclusion of the judgment of the court below is followed, and this court is decided as follows only for the conviction recognized by the judgment of the court below.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. Defendant A did not commit a violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (joint conflict) against the victim’s R, a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict), a victim’s BU, BZ, CB, CA, DB, and DC, and the lower court’s sentencing against Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing against Defendant B is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

C1) As the police officer illegally engaged in the prosecution due to illegally collected evidence, such as misunderstanding of facts, exceeded the scope of the search and seizure warrant against Defendant C’s office, excessively searched digital information by requisition, and then printing out digital information without providing Defendant C with an opportunity to participate, the evidence collected or collected by the search and seizure as evidence of unlawful collection, and the prosecution of this case based on illegally collected evidence is unlawful by abusing the right of prosecution, the lower court convicted Defendant C of all charges.

arrow