[횡령][공2005.12.1.(239),1920]
The case affirming the judgment of the court below which held that the crime of embezzlement is established where the defendant arbitrarily uses the money wired by mistake in his own account to another account, etc.
The case affirming the judgment of the court below that the crime of embezzlement is established where the defendant arbitrarily uses the money wired by mistake to his own account to another account, etc.
Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act
Supreme Court Decision 66Do1705 Decided July 24, 1968
Defendant
Defendant
Attorney Choi Jae-ho
Daegu District Court Decision 2005No773 Decided July 26, 2005
The appeal is dismissed. 80 days out of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
Examining the evidence adopted by the court of first instance by the court below in light of the records, it is justified that the fact that the additional remittance of 320 million won to the account in the name of the defendant was made by mistake on March 21, 2003, and the defendant's act was confirmed to have been used voluntarily by transferring the above amount to another account and that the defendant maintained the judgment of first instance which was applied to embezzlement (see Supreme Court Decision 66Do1705 delivered on July 24, 1968), and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to mistake of facts or acquisition in embezzlement due to violation of the rules of evidence, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.
Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and 80 days of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Park Jae-sik (Presiding Justice)