1. The part of the lower judgment dismissing the public prosecution is reversed.

2. The instant case is remanded to the Changwon District Court’s sole trial division.

1. Where there are several orders for the judgment, such as partial conviction and partial acquittal of a case prosecuted at the same time as a concurrent crime committed by a party member, the part included in the one part may be separately appealed from other parts, and the part not appealed by both parties becomes final and conclusive. Thus, where only the prosecutor appealeds the part not guilty as to the part of concurrent crimes, the part of the judgment of the first instance which found the defendant and the prosecutor guilty as to the part not guilty is final and conclusive as the period for appeal expires, and the part of the judgment of conviction which was not appealed before the appellate court is pending in the appellate court. Accordingly, if it is reversed by the appellate court, only the part of the acquittal shall be reversed (see Supreme Court Decisions 91Do1402, Jan. 21, 1992; 2010Do10985, Nov. 25, 2010). Such a legal principle also applies to a part of the case prosecuted at the same time as concurrent crimes, and a part of the public prosecution can be dismissed at the same time.

The lower court convicted the Defendant as to embezzlement of occupational duties, preparation of false official document, and the exercise of false official document among the facts charged in the instant case. The lower court dismissed the prosecution as to interference with the exercise of the right to abuse of authority, and found the guilty portion as to the embezzlement of occupational duties, preparation of false official document, and the exercise of false official document which the Defendant and the Prosecutor did not appeal for the dismissal portion of the public prosecution. As such, the scope of the lower court’s judgment is limited to the violation of the exercise of the right to exercise of authority

2. The crime of abusing authority of this case constitutes a single comprehensive crime. The written indictment of this case states that “The Defendant, within the C elementary school principal school room located in the Gu of Changwon-si, around May 2012, using school meals to L, who is a nutrition teacher of the said elementary school, she put in drinking to his/her house.”