beta
Cases
2017Do4309 A. Violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act
(b) Violation of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment.
Defendant
A person shall be appointed.
Appellant
Defendant
Defense Counsel
Law Firm AD
Attorney AF, AE, AI, AJ, AK
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul High Court Decision 2016No2740 Decided March 15, 2017
Imposition of Judgment
June 15, 2017
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).
In light of the relevant legal principles and evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the permissible scope of Amendments to Bill of Indictment, the establishment of joint principal offenders, and the arrangement of the offense of violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding facts contrary to logical and empirical rules, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Park Jae-young
Justices Lee Ki-taik
Justices Kim Yong-deok
Chief Justice Kim Shin-chul
Justices Kim Gin-young