배임
The prosecution of this case is dismissed.
1. On September 2015, the summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant was in a position to manage the administrative affairs of the hospital in the “E convalescent hospital” operated by the victim D, who was in the Seocho-gun, Busan, Busan, for the purpose of performing the business affairs of the hospital, and thus, there was a duty to use the credit card for the business affairs of the hospital and to not use it for a private purpose.
Nevertheless, on October 2, 2015, the Defendant paid KRW 23,700 by the victim’s Korean card (F) in order to purchase the Defendant’s express bus passes for private use, irrespective of the hospital services, at an express bus terminal located in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, to purchase the Defendant’s private use, and around that time, used KRW 32,449,753 in total for 568 times from that time to January 29, 2016 as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table, and acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to the above amount for the Defendant’s private use unrelated to the hospital services and caused damage to the victim’s property.
2. We examine the judgment, and the facts charged are crimes falling under Article 355(2) of the Criminal Act.
According to Article 328 (2) of the Criminal Code which is applied mutatis mutandis by Article 361 of the Criminal Code, if there is a relationship of relationship between the victim and the defendant under the above provision, the crime of breach of trust can be prosecuted only upon the victim's complaint.
According to the records, the defendant and the victim are the relatives of the victim under Article 328(2) of the Criminal Act as a punishment. On September 19, 2017, after the prosecution of this case was instituted, a written withdrawal of the victim's complaint was submitted to this court.
Therefore, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act.