beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.07.24 2018고단4475

업무상횡령

Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Facts charged

1. From May 2002 to December 2017, the Defendant’s status relationship with the Defendant is a person engaged in the business automation (referring to the task of collection, processing, preparation, entry, accumulation, transmission, reproduction, etc. of information, which is generally conducted using electronic technology or communications technology, and supporting the efficiency of business and decision-making) such as information collection, processing, recording, accumulation, transmission, reproduction, etc. from the victim’s “D” in the Seoul Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Operation of the Victim C from May 2002 to the victim’s “C” in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul. A person engaged in the business of supplying a variety of automated machinery and related goods to the users of the machinery and equipment and receiving the payment therefor, thereby depositing the victim’s money in cash as above to the victim.

2. Around July 2009, the Defendant supplied three administrative automation devices, such as earth and sand needed for duplication machines, etc., to E, and embezzled KRW 1,401,40,00 as the price for storage on behalf of the victim, and then voluntarily consumed for living expenses, etc. around that time, as indicated in the attached list of crimes, as indicated in the attached list of crimes, (i) supplied office automation devices and related articles on 262 occasions from July 2009 to December 201, and (ii) embezzled KRW 186,158,130 as the price for storage on behalf of the victim, while voluntarily consumed for living expenses, etc.

The above facts charged are crimes falling under Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, and in the case of relatives not living together by the victim, crimes subject to prosecution can be prosecuted only upon the complaint of the victim pursuant to Article 328 (2) of the Criminal Act applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 361 of the Criminal Act.

According to the records, the father F and the victim C are punished by imprisonment between the father and the victim, and the defendant and the victim are not living together.

The victim of this case is indicted.