beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.17 2017고단466

횡령등

Text

The crime of the 2017 order 466 order of the defendant is punished by imprisonment for 4 months and the crime of the 2017 order 915 order of the decision.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On August 28, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Eastern District Court, which became final and conclusive on September 5, 2013, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on March 25, 2014. On December 22, 2016, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court, which became final and conclusive on December 30, 2016. On September 22, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment for fraud and became final and conclusive on February 15, 2017.

Criminal facts

The defendant of "2017 Highest 466" is a person who acquired and actually operated C Co., Ltd. from May 201 to operate merchandise coupon distribution business.

1. Around May 30, 2011, the Defendant entered into an agreement with the victim for supply of gift certificates around May 31, 201 with the victim D at the office of Seongdong-gu Seoul Etel 306, Seongdong-gu Seoul, to supply the victim D with a new global gift certificate and home fluort gift certificates.

Around May 31, 2011, the Defendant received a transfer of KRW 20 million in the name of a deposit to F, a gift certificate from the injured party, to the Defendant, from a new bank account (Account Number: G) in the name of C Co., Ltd., and used the Defendant’s office operating expenses and debt repayment for the victim at around that time.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

2. The Defendant embezzled the victim H at around May 31, 201, the Defendant concluded an agreement with the victim and the gift certificates supply to the victim H on the same day.

The Defendant received KRW 30 million in the name of the deposit money from the victim of the same day to the new bank account as stated in paragraph 1, and used the money for personal purposes, such as the Defendant’s office operating expenses and debt repayment, around that time.