특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등
The part of the judgment of the first and second court against the defendant shall be reversed, respectively.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.
1. An ex officio decision (ex officio reversal due to a change in indictment) was made in the trial of the court of first instance, the prosecutor applied for amendments to a bill of amendment to a bill of amendment, which reduces the amount of profit from the crime of occupational breach of trust from the amount of loans extended by the victim AA Bank (hereinafter “victim Bank”) to the defendant, who was the object of the judgment of the court of first instance, [excluding the portion of loans in the name of W Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.” in the name of June 15, 2009) 4.5 billion won in the name of the corporation], which was the object of the judgment of the court of first instance, by deducting the amount of profit from the amount of loans of the victim A
On the other hand, the prosecutor added the defendant, who was the object of the second judgment, to the ancillary charge of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation), to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation). It is interpreted as changing the charge of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes
Ultimately, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant should be reversed.
The Defendant’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation of Trust) which the first instance court found the Defendant guilty was in the relation of a single comprehensive crime. As such, some of the facts charged were modified, and thus, the sentencing conditions were not the same.
Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant should be reversed, including the part that was not modified as charged.
However, the defendant and prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court.
The revised facts charged are the same.