업무상횡령
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant, the president of a cooperative association of D Agricultural Cooperatives, should deal with the legal issues that had existed between the victim E in the assault case, as a personal case, or as a partnership case, was dealt with as a provisional payment of the attorney’s fees at the end, and as a result, the Defendant had an intent to obtain unlawful acquisition of the Defendant even when holding a board of directors of the cooperative and holding a case of enforcing litigation costs.
Although it cannot be seen, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for a period of five months) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As a matter of principle, an attorney fee, which can be paid at the expense of an organization as a matter of fact-misunderstanding, is limited to cases where the organization itself becomes a party to a lawsuit, so the attorney fee for a civil and criminal case in which the representative of an organization becomes a party to the lawsuit cannot be disbursed at the expense of an organization. An exceptional case where a dispute arises in relation to an act performed by an individual for legal reason, but is a party to a lawsuit or other legal procedure, or an act lawfully conducted for the sake of a representative, etc., the pertinent legal dispute may pay attorney fee at the expense of an organization only when there is a special need to conduct a lawsuit or respond to a complaint for the interest of an organization in light of the overall circumstances at the time when the pertinent legal dispute is deep and present (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6280, Oct. 26, 2006). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the trial court, D Agricultural Cooperatives (hereinafter “CFFC”) is the head of the association.