횡령
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On December 27, 2012, the Defendant received 6 million won from the victim C to E to use it as employment expenses for D trade union employment expenses from the victim in the French area around Busan around the morning, and embezzled 6 million won for the victim by voluntarily consuming it to the Defendant’s account at the time of the transfer.
2. If a person who provided a salary or labor for an illegal cause under Article 746 of the Civil Act provides that he/she shall not demand the return of such profits, the person who provided a salary may not demand the return of such profits to the other party on the ground that the act is legally null and void, and the ownership of the goods provided is owned by himself/herself.
Since the claim for return based on ownership cannot be filed, the ownership of the goods provided ultimately belongs to the other party to whom the benefits were paid, the money provided by the Party A to deliver from the Party B to a third party for the purpose of giving a bribe to a third party or giving a breach of trust, falls under the illegal cause of payment, and the ownership of the goods belongs to the Party A, and the said money was consumed voluntarily by the Party A without delivering it to a third party.
Even if the crime of embezzlement is not established (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do9488, Aug. 23, 2007; Supreme Court Decision 99Do275, Jun. 11, 1999). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the defendant stated that ① the defendant may make the victim of the victim of the victim of the victim of the crime of embezzlement be employed through the victim of the victim of the crime of embezzlement with the amount of KRW 38 million,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000 won, etc., were remitted to E, and the defendant voluntarily consumed to E.