beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to Defendant A’s ground of appeal
A. The crime of embezzlement is established since the use of funds entrusted by others for the purpose other than the purpose of being strictly limited for the purpose of occupational embezzlement in relation to the Ninformation High School (hereinafter “Ninformation High School”) is an act of using funds in itself, even if the person who entrusted the funds, thereby realizing the intent of unlawful acquisition. Since the income belonging to the accounts for school expenses is strictly limited, such as the transfer or lending of the income belonging to the accounts for school expenses to other accounts, if the income belonging to the accounts for school expenses is used for any purpose other than the purpose of legitimate accounts for school expenses, i.e., the act of using the income belonging to the accounts for school expenses, which is included in the expenditure of legitimate school expenses, i.e., the act of using the funds itself, realize the intention of unlawful acquisition, and thus, it cannot be exempted from the liability for the crime.
(2) According to the reasoning of the lower court’s judgment, the lower court determined that the act of arbitrarily consuming the school meal cost paid by the N Information and the students falls under the school accounting of the school juristic person M, and that the act of occupational embezzlement constitutes the crime of occupational embezzlement, and found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the aforementioned legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal doctrine of occupational embezzlement, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle
B. As to the occupational embezzlement in relation to the use of N Information and Corporate Card, the lower court stated in its reasoning.