beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2015.01.07 2014고단305

횡령

Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. Under the premise, the Defendant, along with C and the victim D, invested KRW 1,300,00,000 (each of the Defendant and the victim, KRW 450,000,000, KRW 3000,000, KRW 4000,000, KRW 3000 for each of the above foundations’ directors. However, around November 12, 2007, the Defendant agreed to collect the amount invested in the above park cemetery development project from G, H and I, and to resign from office as a director of the above foundation, and agreed to collect the amount invested in the above park cemetery development project from G, H and I, and to withdraw from office as a director of the above foundation, etc., the victim was 400,000,000, KRW 300,000,000, KRW 300,000,000 for unpaid real property, KRW 300,000 for the victim’s and the above amount of debt.

B. On October 31, 2008, the Defendant filed an application for a voluntary auction (L) on the said real estate with the fact that the said real estate was established under his/her own name in Suwon District Court, Sungnam-dong, Sungnam-dong, Sungnam-gu. On April 17, 2009, the Defendant acquired the ownership of the said real estate at auction on the ground of sale by voluntary auction on April 17, 2009 and kept it for the victim (50,000 won shares). On November 26, 2011, the Defendant disposed of the said real estate after receiving KRW 312,60,000 from M around the end of November 201. Since it is possible for M to transfer the ownership of the said real estate at least six months after the move-in report as a land transaction permission zone. Accordingly, on February 9, 2012, the Defendant embezzled the ownership transfer registration under the name of M& 354,380,000 won under the title of the said real estate as a collateral for the purchase price.

2. As the subject of embezzlement is a person who keeps another’s property as a custodian of another’s property, we examine whether the Defendant is “a person who keeps another’s property.”

On the other hand, real estate bid procedures.