beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the grounds of appeal by the defendant
A. As to the embezzlement of the victim BO church, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of embezzlement of the victim BO church among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
In light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the status of custodian in embezzlement by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.
B. As to the embezzlement against the victim J village residents, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of embezzlement against the victim J village residents among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
In light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the custodian status and the object of embezzlement, etc., contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, 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 regarding the aforementioned judgment.
(c)
According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal is permitted on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of the punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.
2. On the grounds for the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court acquitted the prosecutor on the charge of water supply failure among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
In light of the record, the lower court’s above determination is against logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.