업무상횡령
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. In full view of the summary of the grounds for appeal, the facts charged of this case were sufficiently proven, including the current status of sales and receipts, details of H’s statement, and account transaction, etc. However, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case for lack of proof. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a sales member of the victim C’s agency located in Pyeongtaek-si from September 30, 2010 to September 30, 2017, who was engaged in the business of selling and collecting ice trees by the said agency.
On January 2, 2015, the Defendant arbitrarily consumed KRW 14,434,095,00,000,000,000 from E sales stores, which are customers of the above agency, and did not deposit the amount of KRW 148,620,00 in the agency’s account, but was kept in cash for business purposes for the said agency at its own discretion during the period from that time to June 30, 2015.
Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.
B. The judgment of the court below is questionable about embezzlement in that the amount of cash receipts stated in the current status of the balance of sales and receipts is the money that the defendant should deposit in the agency account or deliver to the employee in charge of accounting in the actual amount of money received from the seller. However, there is a change in that the defendant collected a certain amount and deposited it later, ② the victim specified the amount of embezzlement based on the relevant account books and account details, but the victim changed the victim's assertion about the specific amount of the amount embezzled according to the type of the books on the basis of which the amount of embezzlement is specified, and it is insufficient to interpret the victim's assertion and explain it. ③ F.