logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.05.19 2015노5949
횡령
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

All the costs of the trial by the original instance and the trial by the party shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) while operating a taxi, the Defendant only stored the cell phone of the victim D, G, and H, who is a passenger of the taxi, in the taxi and did not intend to embezzled it.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of embezzlement of the deserted article, which is the facts charged of this case, is erroneous by mistake.

2. The crime of embezzlement of the deserted substance from possession was a criminal (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8154, Jan. 27, 2005, etc.) completed by the act of acquiring possession, such as lost property, with the intention of unlawful acquisition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8154, Jan. 27, 2005). The following circumstances revealed by each evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below in the instant case, i.e., the victim H, under the influence of alcohol around 02:0 on February 11, 2015, at around 14:30 on the same day, he/she confirmed that his/her cell phone was lost after he/she got from the taxi operated by the defendant while under the influence of alcohol, and contacted him/her to the cell phone at around 14:30 on the same day, and the cell phone was sent to the driver (defendant) and promised to exchange the cell phone during the retirement hours.

(2) On May 7, 2015, the Defendant: (a) found the police officer, and submitted to the police officer the victim D and G mobile phone acquired before the location of the aforementioned mobile phone, along with the aforementioned mobile phone; (b) submitted the victim D and G mobile phone to the police officer; and (c) the victim G called the cell phone after having lost his/her mobile phone in the taxi while returning home after drinking alcohol, but all the phone was taken out, and all the phone was taken out on the following day, but all the phone was taken out on the next day.

A statement; (4) A victim D lost a mobile phone around April 30, 2014; (5) around May 8, 2014; and (3) around February 11, 2015, respectively; and (4) the Defendant had a long period of time thereafter.

arrow