특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s imprisonment (three years and eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment is against the defendant's recognition of his own crime, and the profit gained by the crime seems to be less than the amount stated in the crime.
The defendant paid 35 million won to the victim through a set-off with retirement allowances, etc., and some damage can be recovered due to the payment of insurance money for fidelity guarantee insurance.
However, the instant crime was committed by abusing the fact that only the drug price actually used by a large hospital while working as the team leader of the business department of the victim company that supplies drugs to a large hospital, and the remainder is maintained in stock for about one year, and embezzled as if he supplied drugs to a large hospital for about 1.6 billion won, and then disposed of through his own personal business entity through the disposal of the said price through the large hospital, thereby making the said payments out of cash for the level of foreign source.
The defendant has been punished for a crime of embezzlement of KRW 12 million which was requested by relatives in 2010 and used for gambling funds.
The defendant has been unable to recover most of the damage suffered by the victim.
In full view of such circumstances, Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentencing conditions and the range of recommended sentencing guidelines as indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair because it is too large.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
3. The application for compensation filed by the applicant for compensation regarding the determination of the application for compensation constitutes “where the existence or scope of liability for compensation by the defendant is not clear” as provided by Article 25(3)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.
4. The Defendant’s appeal is dismissed on the grounds that the appeal is without merit, and the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation is dismissed in accordance with Article 32(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.