beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, the crime of taking property in breach of trust under Article 357(1) of the Criminal Act is established when a person who administers another’s business obtains property or pecuniary benefits in return for an illegal solicitation in relation to his/her duties. Although it does not require that the act of taking property or pecuniary benefits be inflicted on the principal, it is not established unless an illegal solicitation is accepted between a person who provides property or pecuniary benefits and a person who acquires it
Here, “illegal solicitation” does not necessarily require that it constitutes the substance of occupational breach of trust, and it is sufficient to say that it goes against social rules or the principle of good faith.
In determining this, the contents of the solicitation, the amount of the consideration related thereto, forms, and integrity of transactions, which are protected by the law, shall be comprehensively considered, and the solicitation shall not be necessarily explicitly.
Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the foregoing legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, as well as the foregoing, that the lower court found Defendant A guilty of taking advantage of the facts charged, on the grounds the lower court was justifiable in that it did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding “illegal solicitation” in the crime of taking property in breach of trust or by misapprehending the logical and empirical rules and by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.
2. Defendant B’s grounds of appeal (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed) are as follows.
The judgment of the court below on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes.