logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.12.08 2016노3637
업무상횡령
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, who is the representative director of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), does not have any instruction or request to lend KRW 130 million out of the research and development expenses subsidized by the Korea Creative Content Agency for Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “I”), and therefore, he cannot be deemed to have conspiredd to commit embezzlement by B and H, the representative director of G, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby finding the Defendant guilty of charges.

The Defendant asserts that the Defendant did not use part of KRW 130 million, which was transferred to the National Bank account in I through the grounds for appeal, for the Defendant’s business fund, etc. However, this is merely an ex post facto circumstance after the completion of the crime, and thus does not affect the establishment of the crime of embezzlement of this case.

Furthermore, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, in particular H’s statement in the court of original trial, the fact that the defendant used part of the above KRW 130 million for personal purposes, such as his business fund, is sufficiently recognized.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake, in particular, H and B's statements in the original court's court's decision, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant was instructed or requested to allow the representative director of each company, B and H to lend KRW 130 million out of the research and development funds subsidized by the Korea Creative Content Agency to I, while the defendant actually involved in the operation of G and I.

Defendant’s assertion of mistake cannot be accepted.

B. Although determining the assertion on unreasonable sentencing, the total amount of KRW 130 million for research and development expenses is recovered and the damage is recovered.

arrow