English Translation

21 Kompaniestab in Marktredwitz is strong from lo to l4 man through= average, forms a cooking community for which a woman is employed for cooking, while l Mannder Komp. provides auxiliary kitchen service. People give for this all food brands, which are used for lunch, while the dinner is almost excluded= loosely branded. For Saturday and Sunday, people receive their food stamps for meat and fat. The former company chief Hptm.Gleissner also took part in this and gave all kinds of food stamps. During his vacation from 1 to 29.5.43, the defendant represented him. This asked whether he could also eat in this community. Mr. Gleissner answered him that he could do so if he gave away the marks of life for it. The defendant did not remember that. However, the witnesses still know this according to their sworn statement. At the end of the holiday of Hptm.Gleissner, the former manager of the kitchen community Uffz.Schneider, the food stamps of the defendant, because he had not given anything to the defendant so far=. The defendant gave him then 2 food stamps for holidaymakers for one week each. When Schneider replied that the rich nic+ had been eating with him for four weeks, he replied that he also had brands left for his visits to the control stations, but it would be enough. Uffz.Schneider did not agree to this, but stepped away without reply. When the defendant had taken over the company as chief on 20.7.44, he ate on average every 2nd day in the kitchen=community until May 1984, without ever giving off a food stamp=, while he paid the money-to-he for each on time. It was annoyed by the fact that the boss did not issue any stamps, and also asked the accounting officer at that time, Nahr auí, to demand the stamps. He dared not approach the boss, who was considered to be strict. However, the Hptfw., whose business it would have been to draw the attention of the boss to this maladministration, said to Nahr, that he wanted to pick it up in order to have another fallacy in his hand. He claims that there was tension with the boss at the time and that he did not dare to approach him because of the marks. The defendant claims that he had acted only lightly, that he hadn't thought at all about the necessity of the trademark levy. This allegation is refuted by the hint, the Hptm.Gleissner Anf g Mai lg44, that he must make marks and by the fact that the suffrage. tailor food stamps for 4 weeks aigabrxEgrxt has spent at the end of May l943, while the defendant gave nğr for 2 weeks. The defendant has thus allowed his subordinates to tolerate him to be present without a trade mark, with the food purchased from the trade marks of the subordinates. This is an abuse of the authority of service according to § ll4 MStGB This does not change anything if the defendant once passed l5 pounds carp to the cooking community, which he had received from the circle=leiter for his people and if he once had a kid used by the cooking society during his holiday, that he could not consume himself as a result of his leave of absence. The defendant, as the chief of the company, is obliged to take care of the welfare of his subordinates and also materially, he has to ensure that everyone receives the food he is entitled to. In contrast, he harmed them by participating in the meals without a trademark tax, which were procured with the trademarks of the subordinates. The defendant has therefore exposed himself to the accusation that an officer takes and eats something from his superiors from their food. This is a serious accusation and a great damage to the reputation of the officer corps. If penalizing the previous impunity, the good judgment, the ideal commitment for party and 4