beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding evidence), the facts that the defendant has gathered in advance about KRW 6.5 billion and KRW 2.9 billion, the co-offender H, L, M, etc. transferred to the commission of embezzlement according to his mother, the defendant managed the funds of the damaged company through AK, AK takes office as the representative director of the victimized company at the request of the defendant, and the facts according to the defendant's instruction can be acknowledged.
According to the legal principles as to such factual relations and conspiracy relations, the defendant can fully recognize the fact that he/she participated in all of the embezzlement of this case as an accomplice.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of each of the instant charges on the ground that the evidence presented by the Prosecutor alone, in collusion with H, L, Q, M, X, and W, embezzled KRW 6.5 billion funds of the victimized company in collusion with H, L, M, M, and X, took part in embezzlement of KRW 2.9 billion funds of the victimized company in collusion with H, M, M, and embezzlement of KRW 2.3777,577 million funds of the victimized company managed at a female branch in collusion with H and M, was difficult to deem that each of the instant charges charged was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt for deliberation.
Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error by mistake of fact and no error affecting the judgment.
Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.