특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)등
The judgment below
The guilty part of the defendant (including the acquittal part of the reason) shall be reversed.
The defendant is innocent.
1. Of the instant facts charged against the Defendant, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of each of the occupational embezzlement of KRW 330 million related to the capital increase with the capital increase as of April 14, 2009 and KRW 30 million related to the capital increase with the capital increase as of May 27, 2009, and sentenced 1 year of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution, and sentenced the Defendant not guilty on the grounds of the remaining violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) in relation to the single comprehensive crime. The lower court acquitted the Defendant on the charges of fraud and attempted fraud.
On the other hand, only the defendant appealed on the guilty part of the judgment of the court below on the ground of mistake and unreasonable sentencing.
Therefore, among the judgment of the court below, the part of acquittal of the defendant in the order of the court below is not included in the subject of the judgment of this court because it is already separately decided, and the part of acquittal of the reason was judged in the trial together with the guilty part in the relation of the crime, but it was not subject to the judgment of this court because it was out of the object of attack and defense between the
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant of mistake of facts did not have conspired with B, the representative director of the Fund in relation to each business embezzlement of KRW 330 million related to capital increase with capital increase as of April 14, 2009, and KRW 30 million related to capital increase with capital increase as of May 27, 2009, and KRW 30 million related to each business embezzlement of KRW 30 million as of May 27, 2009, and the Defendant did not have any reason to use G’s funds for private purposes. In short, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
3. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.
The prosecutor shall not be guilty of the reasoning of the judgment below among the facts charged in this case against the defendant at the third trial date of the trial.