beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.03.27 2015고합18

특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant entered into an agency contract with C and Germany D head office, and is the representative of F Co., Ltd. (Seoul Guro-gu G) who supplies goods to the Si construction, such as the two industries after being supplied with the “E” monopoly by C.

1. The Defendant, as the representative of the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), has been taking overall control of F’s business and management, sentenced the Defendant to embezzled F Corporation’s funds, the victim, with the “pre-determineded a false available cash account in advance, and then withdrawing it under the pretext of provisional payment, and then offsetting it against the false available cash account.”

The Defendant, at the above F Office around July 20, 2010, withdrawn KRW 260,000 from the F Corporation Account (Korea Bank H) to FI Account (Korean Bank J) by the foregoing method, and immediately embezzled KRW 260,000,000 for F Corporation Funds by means of remitting the said KRW 260,000,000 to C Vice-PresidentK (the head of CAutomatic Business Headquarters at that time). The Defendant embezzled KRW 260,00,000 for F Corporation Funds from January 20, 2010 to November 20, 2014 as indicated in the attached list of crimes.

2. On July 20, 2010, the Defendant, at the above F Office, transferred KRW 260,000,000 to K account via FI’s account, upon request, to C Vice President K (the head of the automation headquarters at that time) that F had been supplied with E products by entering into a domestic monopoly agency contract, “F continues to be continuously supplied with E products and at the same time, convenience is offered to F so that F would be supplied with low prices at the time of supply of E products from C.”

As a result, the Defendant provided property along with an illegal solicitation in relation to K’s exclusive agency contract management business with K.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1.As to I.