beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.06.03 2018노7920

업무상횡령

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The amount of goods indicated in the facts charged of this case’s assertion of mistake of facts is merely that the defendant received credit payment based on the sales claim at the time the father N of the defendant operates as an individual company.

The defendant's KRW 780,000 received from F cannot be viewed as the amount paid as the price for the goods by G.

The defendant, who is not the victim, thought that he will receive N, and receives money.

Therefore, the defendant did not have embezzled the money of the victim and did not have the intention of embezzlement.

B. The victim claiming unreasonable sentencing is the N’s inherited property, and the fourth H, who is the victim, filed a complaint to find the Defendant.

The amount embezzled by the defendant is not more than KRW 780,00,000 and has not been much converted into a corporation and embezzled as a site for the law.

The prosecutor also applied for a summary order of KRW 300,000.

The defendant has been extremely high in favor of N for the purpose of assisting N.

In light of this, the punishment (one million won of fine) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the following facts may be acknowledged. (A) The victim, a corporation whose establishment was registered for the purpose of printing manufacturing business, etc. on October 10, 2014, and the father N of the Defendant comprehensively acquired the business of a private company operated by the Defendant’s father as “O” at the time of its establishment.

B) Before the victim was established, the Defendant participated in the operation of N and the “O” before the victim was established. After the victim was established, the Defendant was in office as an internal director and was in charge of the payment of the price. C) requested the Defendant to pay the price of the goods directly to G, which is the customer of the victim.

Accordingly, the F employee F in charge of G remitted KRW 50,00,000 to the deposit account in the name of the defendant, and KRW 280,000 to August 1, 2015, and the defendant remitted the above money.