In the event that an investment formed for recovery of claims has voluntarily consumed the activity fund by the general manager of the protection organization, the copies of embezzlement;

In a case where a small-sum investor who suffered damage from a bill fraud case was in charge of the total liability of the small-sum investor protection organization established for the purpose of collecting the bill money, if the small-sum investor who was affiliated with the organization consumes the money shared to meet the operating expenses of the organization in accordance with the organization’s operational purpose against the intent of custody, the Defendant cannot be exempt from the liability of embezzlement even if he was given the authority to act and operate the organization.

Article 356 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Kim Sang-chul

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 83No463 delivered on May 24, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The Defendant’s defense counsel’s grounds of appeal and the grounds of supplementary appeal to the extent of supplement are examined together.

At the time of the original adjudication, the small-value investor protection organization is a small-value investor protection organization in possession of a bill issued by the public Land Co., Ltd., and is an organization formed by the small-value investor (the holder of a small-value bill less than 30 million won) who suffered damage due to fraud in the bill, and the defendant's custody of 11,910,000 won, which is the money of 396 small-value investors affiliated with the above organization, was distributed to meet the expenses for the operation of the organization and the activities of the organization for the purpose of organizational integrity, and therefore, it is apparent by the facts and relevant evidence that the court below decided that 396 of the small-value investors affiliated with the above organization was the money, and therefore, the authority to operate the organization and operate the organization is granted, but if the defendant consumess the above money for a deceitful interest contrary to the intent of the custody, it should be liable for the crime of embezzlement.

The court below's decision is just in finding that the name of KRW 7,902,00, which is the amount of embezzlement of the defendant, is KRW 1,200,00 for establishing a small-sum investor protection organization, KRW 1,752,00 for purchasing a magazine, KRW 1,752,00 for the investment world, and KRW 4,950,00 for the sales market. However, according to the relevant evidence cited by the court below, it is sufficient to recognize the facts that the expenditure statement is merely the name, and that the defendant consumeds the amount for private interest regardless of the activities that are reasonable for the operation of the organization at the time of the original market or for the purpose of the formation of the organization, and therefore, it cannot be said that the defendant embezzled the amount of KRW 7,902,00 for the personal interest regardless of the activities that are reasonable for the operation of the organization at the time of the original market.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)