횡령
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
, however, this shall not apply to the defendant.
1. The Defendant in the facts charged of the instant case lent KRW 120 million to D in around 2009, and was unable to receive approximately KRW 60 million in repayment. The Defendant leased a vehicle under the name of Company E operated by D, and the Defendant decided to use the leased vehicle and pay the lease amount and substitute for repayment of the said obligation.
On January 7, 2010, the Defendant entered into a lease contract with the victim company in the name of the victim company E at the Incheon branch of the Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “victim company”) located in the 7th floor of the Heungdong-gu, Nam-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Seoul Metropolitan City”) and kept the said body-person vehicle for the victim company or D after receiving the above body-person vehicle from the victim company.
However, since D paid only the lease fee of KRW 29,129,234 over 19 times until September 5, 201, the lease contract was terminated as it was no longer paid the lease fee due to the aggravation of economic situation.
From September 201, the victim company notified D that the above vehicle should be returned to D, and D requested that the above vehicle be returned to D around December 201, the victim company, however, the defendant rejected it, but the defendant was investigated by the prosecutor's office of Incheon District Prosecutors' Office No. 423 around June 10, 2013 and embezzled the above vehicle by refusing to return the vehicle for about one year and six months until he expressed his intention to refuse the return.
2. The summary of the judgment of the court below is that D or E, a company following the probative value as a disposal document of the lease contract, is merely a nominal lender, and since it is difficult to view the parties to the contract as the defendant and the victim company, it cannot be deemed that there is a direct consignment relationship between the defendant and the victim company, and even if the victim was deemed as D or E, the victim was deemed as E and the defendant of D (or its operation).