beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. As to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal on the grounds of appeal, the lower court convicted Defendant B of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (excluding the part of innocence in the reason), and the Act on the Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment (hereinafter “Regulation of Criminal Proceeds Concealment”), among the facts charged against Defendant B, of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (excluding the part of innocence in the reason), and the part of the violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (excluding the part of innocence in the reason) through fraudulent illegal transactions (hereinafter
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the status of a custodian on duty in the crime of violating the Specific Economic Crimes Act (Embezzlement), illegal obtaining intent, intentional act, joint principal offender, the crime of violating the Regulation of Criminal Proceeds Concealment Act, and the establishment of a crime of violating the Capital Markets Act, the burden of proof, the burden of proof, and the basic principle of criminal law, the principle of
Defendant
Examining the various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records, such as the age-oriented environment, relationship with victims, motive means and consequence of each of the instant crimes, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court cannot be deemed extremely unfair to sentence Defendant B of imprisonment with prison labor for up to 10 years and fine of up to 300 million won, even in light of the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.
On the other hand, the prosecutor of the lower judgment ex officio examines the assertion that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the scope of the appellate trial, etc. (the filing period and subsequent filing).