logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2014.12.12 2014고단2310
횡령
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The application for compensation order of this case shall be dismissed.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 1, 2009, the Defendant provided that the victim D and E, a couple of the first police officers, left the profits from selling real estate in the event of an accident, and that the amount received from the victims exceeds a certain amount of money, the Defendant provided the victims with the consent of the victims by concluding that the price would be higher than a considerable amount of money.

For the purpose of purchasing real estate, the Defendant received KRW 12 million from the victim E on March 4, 200, KRW 3 million on March 31, 2009, KRW 3 million on April 28, 2009, KRW 3 million on May 12, 2009, KRW 8 million on May 26, 2009, KRW 5 million on May 27, 2009, KRW 20 million on June 4, 2009, KRW 2 million on June 4, 2009, KRW 2 million on June 4, 2009, KRW 1.5 million on June 8, 2009, KRW 2 million on June 4, 2009, KRW 9 million on June 1, 2000 on June 1, 2009, KRW 5 million on June 5, 2005.

While the Defendant kept 26.1.6 billion won in total of the purchase price of the real estate received as above for the victims, the Defendant arbitrarily consumedd the purchase of the two in the white-ray farming association located in the Cheongcheon-si, Young-si, Cheongcheon-si, Cheongcheon-si, Cheongcheon-si, on June 25, 2010.

Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled the total amount of KRW 261.6 billion of the victims.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Investigation reports (Submission of details of remittances);

1. A list of transactions of self-reliance deposits;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on trading lists;

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 355 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. It is not clear that the scope of the defendant's liability for compensation against the applicant for compensation under Articles 32 (1) 3 and 25 (3) 3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Application for Compensation Order is unclear, making an order for compensation in the criminal procedure of this case.

arrow