Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant: [A.] , represented by attorney Dr. Christoph Hohler
  • Respondents: 1. Attorney General of the Canton of Schwyz, 2. [B.] , represented by attorney Dr. Nicole Zürcher Fausch

Facts:

[A.] was sentenced on June 20, 2017, to a conditional prison term of 24 months and a fine for rape, sexual coercion, and harassment. On October 11, 2019, he was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment for multiple fraud and exploitation of a state of necessity. This sentence was increased to 26 months on appeal.

With the appeal, [A.] requests his acquittal or the remand of the case to the cantonal court.

Considerations

The appellant challenges the evaluation of evidence in connection with the fraud allegations. He denies having acted intentionally. According to Art. 146 para. 1 SCC, the perpetrator is guilty of fraud if he deceives someone fraudulently and thereby induces the deceived person to cause damage to their property. The deception must be fraudulent and there must be a motivational link between the deception, the error, and the disposition of property. The lower court relies on an employer inspection by SECO, which found time records that did not correspond to the actual circumstances. The appellant, as a delegate of the board of directors, signed the applications for short-time work compensation and must therefore have known about the illegality of the benefits.

The lower court assumes direct intent, stating that the appellant knew about the falsity of the statements to the unemployment insurance and willfully supported them. Alternatively, it also affirms an intent to commit the crime. The conviction is lawful.

Regarding the allegation of exploitation of a state of necessity, the appellant alleges a violation of the principle of legality and arbitrary…