[횡령][공1991.6.1.(897),1404]
The case reversing the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the ground that it is difficult to see that the defendant has a criminal intent of embezzlement in case where the defendant has made a registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the documents belonging to the defendant pursuant to the agreement on the distribution of property among three the documents constituting the clans with respect to the shares in the name of the defendant among the real estate trusted to the defendant, etc. which
The case reversing the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the ground that it is difficult to view that the defendant has a criminal intent of embezzlement, regardless of the legality and validity of the agreement on the distribution of clan property, in case where the three members of the three members of the three members of the clan, who form a clan, agree to distribute the property by transferring the name of the defendant among the members of the three members of the clan, among the real estate held in title by the defendant, etc., and the council of the members of the clan approved the above agreement.
Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act
Defendant 1 and one other
Defendants
Attorney Lee Sung-hoon (for all the defendants)
Gwangju District Court Decision 90No367 delivered on November 9, 1990
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Gwangju District Court Panel Division.
The Defendants’ grounds of appeal are examined.
1. According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below accepted the judgment of the court of first instance, and recognized the shares in the above shares as the property owned by the defendant 2 and 8, and recognized the transfer registration of the above shares in the name of the above 19th five-story building on April 1, 1987 by embezzlement of the shares in the name of the above 15th five-year trust on the ground that the defendant 21/9 of shares in the above building and the market value equivalent to 10 million won on April 24, 1987 were embezzled for embezzlement of the above shares in the name of the above 19th five-story trust property on the ground that the above 19th five-story trust was registered in the name of the non-indicted 14 of the above 1987.
2. However, according to the records, the defendants asserted that each of the above real estate until the court below's prior testimony was followed by the resolution of the board of directors (119 pages), the meeting minutes of the board of directors quoted in the testimony of the first instance court witness and the second instance court witness at the highest school (125 pages of investigation records), the statement of agreement (125 pages of investigation records) and other documents consistent with the above defendants' assertion that the above defendants were present, considering the ownership of the search lowest spack-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-spa-s-spa-spa-spa-spa-s.
Although the court below should have deliberated and tried on the defendants' criminal intent in mind of the above points, the court below made the above decision without the name, and it cannot be maintained in this regard, since it committed an unlawful act affecting the conclusion of the judgment through an incomplete hearing.
3. Therefore, we reverse and remand the judgment of the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)