logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.03.26 2017고정2896
업무상횡령
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who has entered into a "Franchis Plan and Computer Repair D Business Contract" with the victim E and has been in charge of affairs, such as computer repair services and fees, in the case of the Seoul Songpa-gu Seoul Songpa-gu Business Co., Ltd. (Representative E) for the purpose of repair business.

From September 8, 2016 to October 31, 2016, the Defendant accepted a computer installed in the G house other than the instant case, which is a customer of the victim of the F building 706 of the Gu F building, during the Gyeonggi-gu Gyeonggi-si, and received the repair cost of KRW 340,000,000 for the complainant and kept on duty for the complainant, such as a voluntary consumption without deposit to the victim, etc., the sum of embezzlements in attached Form 19,56,00 won is 3,56,000 won.

B embezzled B.

Accordingly, the Defendant voluntarily consumed the amount of KRW 3.56 million, such as computer repair cost, which was kept on duty for the victim, and embezzled it on duty.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of a defendant in part in the third public trial records;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the accused;

1. Statement protocol by the police for E;

1. Franchise and computer repair D business contract;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on transaction specifications (A), work and collection data, and A settlement details;

1. Article 356 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. On October 10, 2016, the summary of the argument that the Defendant expressed his/her intention to retire, all of the criminal acts before around October 10, 2016 (No. 1 through 5, 18 attached crime list No. 1 to 5, and 18) deposited in cash to the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., and thus, he/she did not embezzled for KRW 1,490,000 out of KRW 3.560,00 as stated in the facts charged, and the remainder did not be deposited in the idea of offsetting the wages that

2. Determination

(a) this Court.

arrow