logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.11.21 2018노2795
횡령등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Regarding the embezzlement of the summary of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant withdrawns money from the victim's account as stated in the judgment below, or this is due to the comprehensive delegation of the victim, so the defendant's act cannot be deemed as embezzlement, and in relation to the above Article of private documents, since the defendant prepared a loan certificate at the location B according to B's intent, it cannot be deemed as forgery, the court below convicted all of the facts charged in this case. Thus, the judgment of the court below is erroneous as a misunderstanding of facts.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s judgment 1) The lower court held that: (a) the victim requested the police to keep money consistently from the police to the court of the lower court and did not allow the Defendant to use the money; (b) the victim did not allow the police to use the money.

(2) The victim, while working as a seafarer, will manage the money to the victim, with approximately 20 days in land per year and all the remainder, and the defendant will manage the money to the victim with intelligence falling below normal level on 2013.

In accordance with the above provision, the head of the Tong, seal, and cream card of the account in which wages are deposited from the damaged person is received, and the defendant used the sum of 95,879,474 won from the victim's account from September 9, 2013 to January 29, 2018 by withdrawing cash over 454 times from the victim's account or using the cream card, etc. ④ The defendant continued to keep the head of the passbook and the cream card from the damaged person, and did not show the head of the passbook or inform the victim of the transaction details; ⑤ the defendant failed to disclose the source of the money deposited in the defendant's account during the above period; ⑤ The victim continued to live on a part of about 20 days a year, the defendant used it by withdrawing money from the victim's account continuously during the period of his/her life.

arrow