beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.07.23 2014노2364

업무상횡령

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The account in which the installment savings are transferred is the same as the account in which the sales fund is paid, and the Defendant has not embezzled the said money since all of the sales fund received from the association related to the business.

B. Even if the Defendant used the sales fund in addition to the business, the Defendant used it.

Even if the official fees paid to the defendant are actually paid to the defendant, the defendant can use them at will, and the defendant has no intent to commit embezzlement against the use for other than the same purpose.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to whether the Defendant used the sales fund of this case for personal purposes, the Defendant can fully recognize the fact that the Defendant paid the installment savings with the sales fund received from the union as stated in the judgment below. This part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

① The Defendant’s receipt of the instant sales fund is an account newly opened on January 11, 2012, which was after the Defendant became the president of a union. In addition to the money deposited from the union including the sales fund of this case, other money was not deposited. The said account appears to be used for receiving the sales fund.

② The Defendant’s installment savings account was opened on January 16, 2012, immediately after the Defendant opened the account for payment of the purchase fund by the president of the union as the president of the union. Thereafter, the Defendant’s installment savings account began to have been automatically transferred from the account for payment of the purchase fund to the Defendant’s installment savings account.

B. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court as to whether the instant sales expense constitutes actual benefit, the following facts and circumstances are examined.