beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to Busan High Court.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. Even if multiple occupational embezzlements are established, it is reasonable to view that the legal interest of damage is a single, the same pattern of crime is identical, and that it is a series of acts due to the realization of a single criminal intent, it is deemed that it is a single crime by universal title.
(2) The court below determined that each of the instant occupational embezzlement acts of the Defendant is only one crime, and that the victim is a medical corporation E-Medical Foundation (hereinafter “the instant medical foundation”), and that the legal interest is the same, and (1) the Defendant paid the construction cost, etc. to be paid by the medical foundation as the chief executive officer of the instant medical foundation, and (2) it did not accept the allegation in the grounds of appeal concerning misapprehension of the legal principles. The court below rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal on this point. The court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles. The court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles, since it is reasonable to view that the Defendant’s act of occupational embezzlement was due to a single crime’s expression of intent, as a whole, the Defendant’s act of occupational embezzlement was committed by the Defendant, as the E-Medical Foundation (hereinafter “the instant medical foundation”).
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the blanket crime in the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.
2. Whether the occupational embezzlement is established;
A. (1) The prosecutor bears the burden of proving the existence of an act of embezzlement as an act of realizing an intent to acquire illegal profits with respect to the part of embezzlement of the funeral hall electric fee, and such proof causes a judge to have such a conviction to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.