A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Punishment of the crime

The size of 47,603 square meters of the C/C forest in the Chungcheongbuk-gun is the forest owned by the said clan, which is owned by the victim D’s clan in title trust with respect to each one-third share of the said clan to E, F and G, and the Defendant, the members of the victim’s clan on December 12, 2011, who were the members of the victim’s clan, kept the entire share transfer registration for the victim’s clan on January 17, 1974 on the ground of the inheritance due to the consultation and division on January 17, 1974, while he kept the entire share transfer registration for the victim’s clan. On December 20, 201, the Defendant arbitrarily sold one-third share of the said forest to D/3 share of the said forest in the office of the Youngdong-gu Office in Chungcheongnam-gu Office in Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul, and on the same day, embezzled the entire share transfer registration for the said forest land in the name of 1/3.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of a witness I, J and K;

1. Judgment as to the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion of the certified copy of the decision of the Daejeon High Court (2006Na6629), the decision of the Supreme Court (207Da52027), the full certificate of registered matters, the full certificate of real estate facts of the clan clan, the certificate of real estate sales contract, the copy of the investigation report (related to attachment, such as a supplementary copy), the notification

1. The summary of the argument is that L clans (hereinafter “L clans”) other than D clans (hereinafter “D clans”) are owned by L clans (hereinafter “L clans”) under title trust to its members, and the Defendant sold 1/3 shares out of the instant land with the consent of the clan’s representative, so there was no criminal intent of embezzlement.

2. Determination

A. The crime of embezzlement is established when a person who keeps another’s property contrary to the fiduciary relationship, which is the entrustment, embezzled, or refuses to return it. Thus, in order for the Defendant to have embezzled the instant land, the actual owner of the instant land should first have a fiduciary relationship between the Defendant and the clan.