beta
Main Issues
The case holding that the victim's intent of illegal acquisition cannot be deemed to exist in the case where he resigned from the office of the chief executive officer of the foundation due to the division with the victim, who is a private village-based system, and then found the victim's office in the office room of the foundation, and saw the victim's bank to be confused in the process of treeing.
Summary of Judgment
The case holding that the victim's intent of illegal acquisition cannot be deemed to exist in the case where he resigned from the office of the chief executive officer of the foundation due to the division with the victim, who is a private village-based system, and then found the victim's office in the office room of the foundation, and saw the victim's bank to be confused in the process of treeing.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 329 of the Criminal Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Decision 72Do2812 Delivered on February 28, 1973
Escopics
A and 2 others
upper and high-ranking persons
Prosecutor
Defense Counsel
Attorney B
Judgment of the lower court
Daejeon District Court Decision 92No1140 delivered on December 17, 1992
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
We examine the grounds of appeal.
Defendant A
As determined by the court below, Defendant A, as the founder of the Incorporated Foundation C, was the president of the said Incorporated Foundation C, after the death of the deceased. Since the above Defendant A resigned from the office of president due to the division with the victim E, a private village-based institution, he was found in the office of the above victim who was responsible for the management of the said Park, and the victim's mistake was found in the process of the victim's office at the corner, and the victim was frightly ill in the process of the victim's mistake, and the victim was also frightd with the victim's house at the same level as himself and did so. The court below's judgment of not guilty was justified in light of the facts charged against the crime of larceny as long as it did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principles as otherwise alleged in the judgment of the court below, since the victim did not have any intention to acquire the above defendant's office, and it did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the larceny.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Yong-sung (Presiding Justice)