beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.09.27 2017노288

횡령

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts as indicated in the lower judgment’s judgment (hereinafter “instant title skiing”) disposed of tkisky as indicated in the facts constituting an offense in the lower judgment was appropriated for realizing the security of the sales price claim in accordance with the collateral agreement, and thus, this cannot be deemed an embezzlement, and the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case as otherwise erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment

2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 5 million) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing)’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the lower court’s determination on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant asserted the same purport as the assertion of mistake of facts among the grounds for appeal.

In full view of the circumstances stated in its reasoning, the lower court, based on the following circumstances, has credibility in the victim’s statement and D’s statement consistent therewith, and Defendant’s defense counsel continues to change not only the process of the custody of the Tki, but also the process of the custody of the Tki’s claim, etc. with the victim’s financial relationship, secured claim, etc.

Based on the judgment of the court below, the court below found the defendant guilty and rejected the defendant's assertion. In comparison with the evidence, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable.

In addition, as alleged by the defendant in domestic affairs, the defendant was provided with the tkis of this case as security for the victim's claims.

Even in this case where there is no evidence to prove that the defendant arbitrarily disposed of it with the victim and agreed to cover the claim, the act of disposing of it without the consent of the victim constitutes embezzlement in relation to the victim is obvious in light of the legal principles. Thus, the charges of this case are charged.