횡령금 청구
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is the same as the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the judgment as stated in paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the
(2) On the other hand, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant embezzled the above money with the name of KRW 15,768,621 as if he/she used the company fund in the name of food and accommodation expenses, and embezzled the above money with the company fund of KRW 2,390,760 as he/she purchased television personally. However, in light of the above facts, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff, as seen earlier, was suspected of having embezzled the company fund at the office of the branch office of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office after the Defendant filed a complaint that he/she embezzled the company fund as above, and received disposition with the intention of suspicion (defluence of evidence) at the branch office of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office. In light of the above facts, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant embezzled the company fund of KRW 15,768,621, as alleged by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, the Plaintiff’
3. Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.