beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. The purport of the law that stipulates the date, place, and method of a crime in the indictment regarding the assertion that the facts charged are not specified is to limit the scope of the trial to the court, and to facilitate the defendant to exercise his/her defense right by specifying the scope of defense against the defendant.
Therefore, it is sufficient that the facts charged are stated enough to distinguish the relevant facts from other facts by integrating the above elements.
Therefore, it did not specify the date, place, method, etc. of the crime in the indictment.
Therefore, it cannot be readily concluded that the overall indication of facts charged is contrary to the intent of the law that specifies the facts charged at all times, and in cases where it is inevitable in light of the nature of the crime, in particular, in the case of a single comprehensive crime, the crime committed by specifying the time, period, method of the crime, the victim or the other party, frequency, and
It can be seen (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6646, Jan. 14, 2005, etc.). The court below held that the facts charged in this case include the date of remittance and remittance of the victim, the amount of embezzlement of the defendant, the method of embezzlement, the place of use, etc. of the defendant's money arbitrarily consumed and embezzled the use of the money by specifying the purpose of use as sound device development cost from the damaged person. The indictment in this case contains the date of remittance of the victim, the amount of remittance, the amount of embezzlement of the defendant, the method of embezzlement, the place of use, etc., and even though there are no specific places other than the main place of use in the indictment
It was determined that there was no possibility to view it.
In light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the specification of facts charged, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.
2. The remainder of the assertion is based on relevant legal principles and records.