logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.03 2015노1061
횡령
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In order to manage business affairs for G after the completion of commercial transactions with G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), the Defendant: (a) removed and transported oil pumps and one pipe 9,601 (hereinafter “the temporary materials of this case”); and (b) performed legitimate civil lien by using the necessary non-repaid claim as the secured claim.

Since H company (hereinafter “H company”) knew that it was owned by G sale to G, it could oppose the H company, and the view that it would compensate for rent after judicial judgment was delivered to G company and H company, there was no intention of embezzlement.

At the time of removal remaining at the actual site, the quantity of the instant temporary materials was lost by 5-10%, and the market price of the instant temporary materials remains less than the unrecovered quantity for G in 2013, the market price of the instant temporary materials remains at KRW 56,814,00, which is the amount stated in the facts charged, is less than the unrecovered quantity

B. In consideration of the various circumstances of unreasonable sentencing, the sentence of the lower court (fine of three million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was the vice president of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) and was the person in charge at the construction site of F new construction works in Jongno-gu Seoul E, which was executed by the said company from December 2, 2012.

On April 2013, G subcontracted the above construction work from D with D was installed at the site after installing the instant temporary materials from H company in order to perform the structural construction work.

On May 17, 2013, the representative of H Company I visited the construction site to receive rent for the temporary materials of this case from G and asked J, a D site manager, to find out whether the rent for the temporary materials of this case may be directly paid from D, the principal contractor, and on October 2013, notified that the temporary materials of this case were leased. On October 2013, I visited the construction site to J.

arrow