beta
서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.13 2015고단2200

횡령

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

Where the above fine is not paid, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 21, 2012, the Defendant, at the Defendant’s home located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, considered the victim D, who is an elderly dementia patient, and received and retained the victim’s money of KRW 40 million to the Defendant’s community credit cooperative account. On February 21, 2013, when purchasing a house located in the name of the Defendant, the Defendant arbitrarily consumed it as the purchase price of KRW 26 million out of the above KRW 40 million and embezzled it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement made by the police in relation to E (1) (2) ;

1. A certificate of details by transaction account, confirmation of account details, investigation report (to hear the statement of the head of the new sexual health center), investigation report (to hear the statement of the head of the F Care Center), copy of the register, meetings to submit each document, and reasons for judgment of conviction of each fact-finding inquiry reply reply (G mental health department, national medical center, and Hsan medical center);

1. The intent of unlawful acquisition in the crime of embezzlement is an intention to dispose of the property of another person in breach of his/her duty for the purpose of seeking the benefit of himself/herself or a third party and to return or compensate it later;

Even if there is no difficulty in recognizing the intent of illegal acquisition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do3431, Jun. 2, 2006), the amount equivalent to the above amount of embezzlement is paid for the victim for at least three years since the date the Defendant committed the crime in its judgment.

Even if this is merely an act of returning or preserving the embezzlement after the embezzlement, it is not an obstacle to recognizing that there was an intention of illegal acquisition of embezzlement against the defendant.

2. The victim as to whether he/she delegated or consented to the victim has been hospitalized from time to time when he/she moved to a hospital, such as G mental clinic, etc., due to symptoms of dementia from the date of the crime as indicated in the judgment.