All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant B and the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, the lower court is justifiable to have found Defendant B guilty of the charge of occupational breach of trust on May 4, 2007, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “act in violation of the rules of logic and experience” or “act in violation of the duties” in the crime of occupational breach of trust.

2. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted Defendant A of the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds that there was no proof of the relevant crime, and upheld the first instance judgment that acquitted Defendant B of the grounds for lack of proof of the relevant crime on part of the facts charged in relation to Defendant B’s occupational breach of trust on March 7, 2008.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below and the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court below in light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error by misapprehending the legal principles as to occupational breach of trust, contrary to what is alleged in

On the other hand, the prosecutor appealed against the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below, but there is no indication of the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal, and there is no statement of the grounds for appeal in the appellate brief.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.