Timeliness of criminal revision and absence of substantive legal error to the defendant's disadvantage

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) Second Criminal Senate reversed the regional court's dismissal of the defendant's appeal for inadmissibility, determining that the appeal was timely filed and properly reasoned, but subsequently rejected the appeal on the merits as unfounded, thereby upholding the original conviction from March 30, 2023; the defendant is ordered to bear the costs of the appellate proceedings and the necessary expenses of the auxiliary plaintiffs. The dispute concerned the procedural admissibility of a criminal revision and the substantive validity of a lower court judgment in a criminal case. The decisive legal basis involved the assessment of the timeliness and sufficiency of the appeal reasoning under German criminal procedure law, followed by a review of the judgment for legal errors to the defendant's disadvantage, finding no such errors.