beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2015.06.03 2014고단2269

횡령

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Around July 12, 2007, the Defendant established the Hong Kong Corporation under the name of “E” (hereinafter “E”) in the name of “F” (hereinafter “ Hong Kong Corporation”) on the sixth floor of the building D in Hong Kong Center. Around August 2007, the Hong Kong Corporation established a “F” subsidiary for the purpose of “the business of giving and receiving house” in Lao from 100% by investing 100%. A shareholder of the Hong Kong Corporation (hereinafter “G”) and the Defendant, a shareholder of the Defendant and the Defendant, invested approximately KRW 5,500,000 in total with the victims, including the fact that the Defendant and the Defendant invested USD (in the name of Vietnam or the actual Defendant and the risk I), the victim J, the victim K, the victim, the victim, the Defendant and G invested approximately KRW 3350,000 in USD 5,500 (6 billion won in Korea).

On January 6, 2012, the Defendant sold approximately 40% of the shares of the Hong Kong corporations to 3,916,000 dollars in the trust account, which is a company managing the Netherlands’s annual fund, and an investment advisory company managing the said N.’s funds. The Defendant decided to keep 20% of the purchase price in the trust account by making payment after the completion of the matters specified in the contract, and then transferred approximately 80% of the actual purchase price to 3,128,884 dollars in the name of the Defendant on February 24, 2012.

On February 24, 2012, the Defendant voluntarily remitted USD 222,00 ($ 243,733,800 in Chinese currency) in return for personal business requested from P in Hong Kong on the same day while keeping the sales price of the shares sold as above for the victims who are shareholders.

Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled USD 88,800 (Korean Won KRW 97,493,520) excluding approximately 60% of the Defendant’s share in the amount of voluntary remittance as above.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victims' property.

2. According to the facts charged, even if the defendant remitted USD 220,00 to P, the remaining 2,90,000 shall be the proceeds of the sale of shares.