특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. The appellate court’s scope of trial was dismissed regarding the violation of the Labor Standards Act among the facts charged in the instant case, and found guilty as to the charge of occupational breach of trust and occupational embezzlement. However, the appellate court’s appellate court’s judgment is limited to the guilty portion, since the part of dismissing the public prosecution was finalized only for the defendant and the prosecutor’s conviction.
2. Summary of reasons for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) In fact, Defendant 1’s middle and high-end market price of rental car is set at 80% of the market price for private cars. In this context, if the remainder of the installment or the installment payment is deducted, the damage of the company’s property is about KRW 8,669,951, and KRW 175,648,371, and KRW 175,648,371, the damage of the company’s property is about KRW 175,64, and the damage of embezzlement is about KRW 175,648,371. However,
2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (unfair sentencing) by the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.
3. Determination
A. 1) Determination on the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts of occupational breach of trust is based on the health care unit, and the prosecutor originally calculated the amount of damages for property in this part at the purchase price of the vehicle according to the accusation of the victim.
However, on June 1, 2018, the defendant's defense counsel submitted to the court of the court below, asserted that the value of the vehicle should be calculated with the highest value, and that the highest value is the siren at the time of the disposition of the vehicle, and the detailed value of 14 vehicles together with the vehicle price data was presented.
Accordingly, the prosecutor accepted the defense counsel's assertion on August 13, 2018, and applied for permission to amend the bill of indictment as the result of deducting the remaining amount from the high value of the siren vehicle as stated in the list of crimes in the original judgment. The court of the lower court permitted it on August 14, 2018.
(c) A defense counsel;