beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged was that the Defendant lost a mobile phone in the Gangnam-gu Seoul apartment in the Seocho-gu Seoul apartment in the early May 2014, and left the phone number for the staff of the apartment management office.
On May 25, 2014, the victim D obtained contact information left by the defendant due to mistake while confirming the loss of the mobile phone at the apartment management office in order to reach an agreement. On the same day, the defendant was aware of the above owner of the mobile phone, and 550,000 won was transferred to the defendant's Agricultural Cooperative Account (the number: F).
Around June 2014, the Defendant was notified of the fact that KRW 550,00,00,000 to transfer money to E was wrongfully remitted to the Defendant’s account, and that he was erroneously remitted from G, and even if requested to return KRW 550,00,00, the Defendant rejected the return and embezzled it.
2. The judgment of embezzlement is an offense with the content that a person who keeps another’s property embezzled or refuses to return the property.
In this case, in order to constitute embezzlement, the Defendant should have refused to return the wrongfully remitted money from the victim, etc. on or around June 2014, even though the Defendant received a request from the victim, etc., but the Defendant was in the position of keeping the money from the victim.
Therefore, even if examining all evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant kept the amount of KRW 550,000 received by mistake from the injured party until June 2014, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the same differently (it is a separate issue from whether the defendant bears the obligation to return unjust profits equivalent to KRW 550,000 to the injured party). Rather, as long as the defendant received the aforementioned amount of KRW 550,00,000 from the remittance, he/she withdrawn and used the said amount in entirety, and as a result, he/she wrongfully remitted the money to the injured party.