beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2012.12.27 2012고단1624

업무상횡령등

Text

The 1-B crime in the judgment of the defendant is a fine of 5,00,000 won, the 1-B crime in the judgment, and the 2-B crime in the judgment.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On January 21, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to five months of imprisonment for embezzlement and one year of suspended execution at the Jeju District Court. On January 29, 2009, the above judgment became final and conclusive.

【Criminal Facts】

1. From the beginning of 2007, the Defendant was working as a business director of the Victim E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) who is a supplier of swine meat processing in Jeju Island from the beginning of 2007, and was engaged in business related to the collection of money, such as securing and managing customers of the Victim Co., Ltd., and requesting the payment of the price for supply.

On October 16, 2009 to March 20, 2010, the Defendant received from Ffood G, which is a customer of the victim company, to transfer KRW 2,800,000 for the supply of swine from H to H’s account on October 16, 2009, and used it for personal purposes around that time while in the course of business custody for the victim company, and embezzled it by arbitrarily consuming the price for the supply of pigs from F Food G from March 20, 2010 to March 20, as shown in attached Table 1.

B. From November 14, 2007 to January 10, 2008, the Defendant arbitrarily used the credit card to pay KRW 1,000,000 for personal oil that is unrelated to the victim company’s business activities on November 14, 2007, when he/she was in custody of the credit card (J) in the name of the victim company issued by the victim company around November 14, 2007, and embezzled it by arbitrarily using the said credit card as shown in the attached list 2 from January 10, 2008.

2. Occupational breach of trust is a business director of the victim company, who is in charge of the business affairs related to the collection of money such as securing and managing customers of the victim company, and requesting the payment of the price of goods, and there was a duty to faithfully manage the claim for the price of goods to the

d. 207