특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)
The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.
Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and six months.
However, from the date when this judgment has become final.
Summary of Grounds for Appeal
A resolution was made to distribute and deposit the instant compensation to the Gu members at the ordinary meeting of January 4, 2010, and the Defendants, according to the above resolution, only carried out specific tasks for distribution through each board of directors of February 25, 2010 and March 18, 2010, and thus, the Defendants cannot be punished for embezzlement, the judgment of the court of first instance that found the Defendants guilty of the instant facts charged is erroneous in matters of mistake of facts.
The sentence of sentencing on the first instance of unfair sentencing (the defendants: the two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment and the fine of 5 million won in each of the two-year imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
The summary of the facts charged in this case’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts is that G is the head of the victim H (the “victim”) who is a non-corporate body of the Korean ancient army (hereinafter “victim”), Defendant C is the father of the victim, Defendant B, D, and director of the board of directors of the victim’s board of directors, the I was the victim’s auditor, and the J was the victim’s general secretary.
Around June 21, 2002, the victim deposited KRW 1,188,949,550, which was admitted to five parcels of land and building outside Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City and five parcels of land and building. The victim deposited and stored the amount of KRW 1,188,949,550 in three passbooks of Tongsan Agricultural Cooperative. Since September 201, the above money resulted in a total of KRW 1,272,643,753 (hereinafter “the compensation of this case”).
The Defendants, along with G, I, J, etc., were in custody for the victims of the instant confinement compensation, were in the process of performing their duties, and the occurrence of the instant confinement compensation occurs due to the differential payment between the former members of the victim (a member prior to 2003) and the new members (a member after 2004). The Defendants, by notifying the former members of the board of directors only, conspired to distribute only 1.2 billion won out of the instant confinement compensation to the former members. On February 25, 2010, the Defendants, G, I, and J were present at the L restaurant located in Goyang-si around February 25, 2010.