logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.06.02 2015노7388
업무상횡령
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant, as indicated in the instant facts charged, was not the Defendant, but the part of the loan to G out of the amount withdrawn from D, as indicated in the instant facts charged; (b) the victim company loaned the loan to G; and (c) other money was appropriated from the Defendant’s claim against the victim company; and (d) the Defendant did not intend to obtain unlawful profits at

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the facts charged of this case.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below also asserted the same purport as the above grounds for appeal, and on this ground, the court below held that the defendant withdrawn money from the victim company's corporate account based on the following reasons: (a) under the title "judgment on the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion", ① the financial status table and the total balance table of the victim D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "victim Co., Ltd.") in 2013 stated that the defendant's provisional deposit amount remains in KRW 253,089,142; and (b) the president of each account of the above company stated the details of partial withdrawal of the crime of this case as the provisional deposit amount, but it is unclear whether the above financial status table, total balance sheet, and separate account ledger accurately reflects the victim company's corporate financial status; and (b) the defendant made several times from 2006 to 2013 deposited money equivalent to the amount of money to the victim company's corporate account, on the ground that the defendant withdrawn money exceeding the above deposit amount as the defendant.

The above argument was rejected in the judgment.

B. (1) In the crime of embezzlement, the intention of unlawful acquisition in the crime of occupational embezzlement refers to the intention to dispose of another person’s property in breach of his/her occupational duty, such as his/her own property, with the aim of seeking the benefit of himself/herself or a third party, and there is an intention to return, compensate or preserve it later.

arrow