beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2015.05.22 2014고정817

업무상횡령

Text

The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is from February 12, 2013 to March 12, 2013, the Defendant has been working as the representative director of the victim E-association in Daegu-gu.

On May 12, 2013, the Defendant used a total of KRW 1,408,00 on 111 occasions from April 26, 2013 to January 31, 2014 by using a corporate card that was in custody for the victim in the G gas station in Daegu-gu for the personal use of the Defendant’s personal service with the corporate card that was in custody for the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

2. Where a judgment corporation or organization has the nature of benefits for compensating for expenses incurred in performing official duties by the so-called sales and official expenses or business promotion expenses paid by the articles of incorporation or other regulations in terms of expenses incurred in performing official duties, and the purpose of its use or purpose is not specified in the articles of incorporation or its payment criteria, the judgment is given to the officers and employees as to whether they are related to the place or scale of use or duties, and such judgment should be respected preferentially.

Therefore, in order to recognize that executive officers and employees embezzled business promotion expenses, etc. with the intent of illegal acquisition, they were disbursed for personal interests without relation to their duties.

It shall be proved that excessive disbursement has been made within a reasonable scope or even in relation to the work, and it shall not be presumed that an officer or employee who has used business promotion expenses, etc. fails to properly explain his/her whereabouts or the user, or fails to submit evidentiary materials on the use ex post facto, and that he/she embezzled it with the intent of unlawful acquisition without permission.

According to the health records and records of this case, ① the Defendant is a cooperative of February 2013.