업무상횡령
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the Defendants are found to have arbitrarily used the said money in violation of their duties, even if they were to receive water rates from the occupants of G calendars, who are victims, and were in the position of keeping them in custody.
Nevertheless, the court below erred in finding a not guilty of the facts charged in this case by misunderstanding facts.
2. The principal agent of embezzlement is a person who keeps another's property, and the custody here means the possession of property in accordance with the law or de facto trust relationship.
In this case, in order to recognize that the defendants are in the position of keeping the water rates paid from the shop occupants in the position of business in the relation to the shop occupants, the shop occupants who are directly responsible for the payment of the water rates to the Korea Railroad Corporation shall be deemed to have made the defendants keep the water rates on their consignment basis.
However, considering the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court, E, a corporation operated by the defendants, as stated in the judgment of the court below, is not simply keeping the water rates received from the occupants of commercial buildings, but is in the position of independently concluding a separate contract and performing the contract between the Korea Railroad Corporation and the occupants of commercial buildings. Thus, the court below's decision of innocence against the defendants on the grounds of its stated reasoning is just and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.