업무상횡령등
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. Defendant B’s defense counsel’s written opinion of the defense counsel on November 29, 2018 asserts that, inasmuch as Defendant B took out the rice actually controlled and stored by Co-Defendant A, etc., and thus, the amount of damage is not excessively calculated, but the amount of damage is not excessive. However, this is not a legitimate ground for appeal as it was asserted after the deadline for submitting the grounds for appeal.
In addition, even if we look at ex officio, Co-defendant A, C, and D of the lower court cannot be deemed as the employee of the victim FRPC as an independent possessor of the rice of this case.
In addition, in full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the defendant E's legal statement, it is judged that the quantity and the amount of damage in the annexed list of crimes in the court below should be calculated appropriately.
The sentence of the lower court (Defendant B: one year and six months of imprisonment, and ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The lower court sentenced Defendant B to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, and ten months for Defendant E, taking into account the unfavorable circumstances and favorable circumstances.
In full view of the facts that are the conditions of sentencing in this court, in particular, Defendant B played a leading role in the instant crime; Defendant B continued to commit the instant crime over a long period; Defendant E had a significant amount of damage; Defendant E had been punished for the same kind of crime in 2006; Defendant E was deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion; and Defendant B was deemed to have exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion; or to have maintained the lower court’s sentencing as it is unreasonable.
In addition, considering the circumstances, age, character and conduct, family relationship, etc. after the crime of this case, the sentence of the court below is proper, and it is not recognized that the sentence of this case is too unreasonable.
3. Conclusion.