beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2015.12.22 2015고단1353

업무상횡령

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 1, 1997, the Defendant is a person who became a victim, and worked as aD in charge of the work of entering, withdrawing, judging, recycling, selling, etc., of a used mobile phone terminal, which was collected from March 201 to March 11, 201, through a compensation sale, etc., and which was repaired and recycled through C through a stock company.

On July 25, 2013, the Defendant: (a) requested to temporarily use and return a mid-term device to the team leader of E, who produces and manages inventory in the said C Renovation plant, which is located in king-si, and (b) immediately received an amount equivalent to KRW 40 million from AIP 3GS-16G 16G 40 million; (c) sold the device and used it for personal purposes at will; and (d) embezzled it for personal purposes by selling the sum of KRW 277 million in the same way three times from March 11, 2014, as indicated in the attached list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The prosecutor's interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Application of written confirmation, terminal and other delivery status, personnel record cards and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Grounds for sentencing of imprisonment with prison labor, Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts;

1. Scope of the recommended sentencing criteria: At least 100 million won, less than 500 million won, and the mitigation area: Imprisonment for six months or two years;

2. The crime of this case is very heavy in which the defendant, who has the decision on the punishment, takes advantage of the fact that he/she performs the work related to the opening and taking out of a main cell phone in the victim company, and sells the cell phone individually by cutting off the main cell phone in an amount equivalent to KRW 277,00,000.

Therefore, even when considering the following circumstances, the sentence of sentence is inevitable to the defendant.

However, on November 1997, the defendant is employed by the victim company for a considerable period of time until there is a crime of this case.