beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty portion shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 20,000,000.
The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) Under the facts charged in this case, C is punished as a joint principal offender with C without changing the indictment. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the amendment of indictment (misunderstanding the legal principles). Since the continuation and single gender of a criminal intent and the continuity of a single gender are cut off on the basis of each fiscal year in which the budget was executed, it shall be deemed that the act committed during the fiscal year, including only the crime committed during the fiscal year based on each fiscal year. As to the act committed in 2008 among the acts committed in the table of the defendant's criticism, the statute of limitations has expired (misunderstanding the legal principles) with regard to the act committed in collusion with the chief of tax affairs and the chief of tax affairs division, but the defendant committed the crime in this case, in collusion with the supplier and acquired the profit of the defendant alone.
The judgment of the court below is erroneous in misunderstanding the facts (misunderstanding the facts) and the sentence of the court below (6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable (negative). B. Regarding the fact of obstructing the exercise of rights among the facts charged in the instant case by the prosecutor, the defendant may have a sufficient influence on the employment of the sports association employees at B, and thus, there is a general duty authority.
In addition, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged (misunderstanding of facts). 2. prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal of ex officio judgment, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of indictment by selectively adding the facts charged to the previous facts charged in addition to the previous facts charged. Since this court permitted it, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.
Section 1-A(1) of the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is about the existing facts charged.