beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty portion shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.
The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.
Reasons
1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court determined that: (a) among the facts charged in the instant case, the testimony of G and I cannot be deemed to have been proven without any reasonable deliberation; (b) the facts charged in each part of the instant case should be acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act; (c) the facts charged in each part of the instant case should be pronounced not guilty on the grounds that: (a) the sum of KRW 20 million was increased by the number of million each from February 2, 2010 to February 2, 2013; and (b) the facts charged in each part of the instant case should be found not guilty on the grounds that: (a) the sum of KRW 1 million each was increased by cash each from February 2010 to February 2012, 200; and (b) the evidence submitted by the prosecutor was not found guilty on the ground that the facts charged in each part of the instant case was a crime of breach of trust; (d) the facts charged in each part of the instant case were not guilty.
Since only the defendant appealed against the guilty portion, each of the above innocence portion was excluded from the object of attack and defense between the parties, and there is no matter to be deliberated and determined ex officio.
Therefore, the scope of this Court's trial is limited to the conviction of the original judgment, and the conclusion of the original judgment is not followed with respect to each of the above innocence.
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to the charge of giving property in breach of trust to G (Article 1 of the facts constituting the crime in the original judgment), the Defendant did not deliver KRW 50 million in total to G at a cafeteria located in the mutual unclaimed cafeterias over two occasions from the beginning of 2012 to August of 2012, and there is no consistency in G’s statement that can be the only evidence for this part of the facts charged.
In addition, the lower court among the facts charged as to the evidence of breach of trust against G, the lower court’s explanation and explanation between the two parties from February 2010 to February 2013.