(a) subjective requirements in the crime of abandonment of duties;

B. The meaning of the time when he abandons his duties

A. The crime of abandonment of duty is established by failing to perform the duty to act under the awareness that the duty to act is discarded, although there is a duty to act specifically as a crime of abandonment of duty.

(b) In the crime of abandonment of duties, the term "when he abandons his duties" means any case not leading to the neglect of abstract duties by law, regulation or instruction, or intelligence, but where it is likely to impair the functions of the State and cause damage to the people, such as unauthorized Desertion of work, the scambling of duties, etc.

Article 122 of the Criminal Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 75Do306 Decided November 25, 1975, 77Do325 Decided January 7, 1978 B. Supreme Court Decision 65Do984 Decided March 15, 1966, 70Do1790 Decided September 29, 1970, Supreme Court Decision 79Do31 Decided February 26, 1980

Defendant 1 and three others

Prosecutor

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 82No2585 delivered on September 23, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The crime of neglecting duties under Article 122 of the Criminal Code must be interpreted as a crime of neglecting duties under Article 122 of the Criminal Code, even though there is a duty to act in detail as a crime of neglecting duties, there is a fact that the duty to act is not performed (see Supreme Court Decision 75Do306, Nov. 25, 1975). In addition, when a public official neglects his duty, it is not all the cases where the public official neglects his duty to act abstractly due to the Acts and subordinate statutes, regulations or instructions, or intelligence, but it is a case where it is likely to impair the State's function and cause damage to the public (see Supreme Court Decision 70Do1790, Sep. 29, 197; 65Do984, Mar. 15, 196). We find that there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of the legal principles as to the duty to act in violation of the rules of evidence and the decision of the court below as to the duty of neglecting duty.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)