횡령
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) even though the Defendant agreed to supplement and discount the face value of KRW 30 million and the amount equivalent to its interest when receiving the check from the victim D to pay the face value of this case, the Defendant voluntarily filled the face value of KRW 100 million, unlike the agreed terms, and then the Defendant purchased the purchase price of Linh at his own discretion, and (b) the Defendant embezzled the check of this case, which was under custody for the victim, but the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the charges of this case by misunderstanding the fact.
2. On September 12, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Seoul Western District Court (Seoul Western District Court), and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 24, 2013.
The Defendant, at the office of the Defendant located in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 2nd floor around May 30, 2013, at the Defendant’s office located in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 30 million won, will be paid to the victim D with the discount from the seat of the Defendant, who is in charge of the check, until June 2013.
Provided, however, the face value of the current check shall be expressed at a discount plus interest on the discount, which shall be issued in blank, and one bank E check ("the check of this case") was issued from the injured party by stating that the check of this case shall be issued in blank.
Therefore, the Defendant received and kept the check of this case for the victim, and then delivered F as the down payment of H and I land, Inc. at the time of that time.
Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.
3. Determination
A. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged on the grounds that each of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor was difficult to believe and otherwise insufficient evidence to prove the facts charged.
B. However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below after duly admitted and investigated evidence, D's reasoning is consistent with the facts charged in the instant case.