(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.07.20 2017고정1828

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.07.20 2017고정1828

업무상횡령

Text

1. Defendant A is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendant is publicly notified.

2. Defendant B is punished.

Reasons

Defendant (Defendant B) served as the deputy head of the administrative agency from August 3, 2015.

The Defendant, while serving as the Vice-Administrative Director, received total of KRW 30 million, including city expenses of KRW 20,000 and KRW 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 from the Gwangju Metropolitan City, and engaged in the storage and use of the subsidy.

Subsidies received from Gwangju Viewing shall be used in accordance with the purpose of the grant of subsidies and the details and conditions of the subsidy program in accordance with the relevant ordinances, etc., and shall not be used for any other purpose, and after completion of the subsidy program, the details of the use of the subsidy shall be submitted to the competent authority for the settlement and return

Nevertheless, the Defendant, in relation to the “F” business, prepared a tax invoice of KRW 2 million to the representative H of “G” under the pretext of an actual inspection banner, and wired the amount of KRW 2 million from the H’s account to the H’s Gwangju Bank account on October 15, 2015, and subsequently, on October 19, 2015, the “F” in the indictment as of October 19, 2015 is obvious that it is a clerical error, and thus, ex officio correction is made.

The amount of KRW 1,048,00 among them shall be returned from H in cash in front of the building in the Nam-gu Seoul metropolitan area I and then embezzled by using it for private purposes in Gwangju.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the witness J and H;

1. Statement made by the police with H;

1. A copy of the report on the results of the settlement of subsidy projects conducted in 2015, a copy of the F subsidy settlement notification, a copy of the settlement report of project costs, and a copy of the decision to grant subsidies;

1. According to each of the above evidence, the Defendant’s payment of advertising fees to H with subsidies received from the Gwangju Metropolitan City may obtain the excess payment from the Gwangju Metropolitan City and then obtain the return of the excess payment and use the excess differently from the purpose of the subsidy.

On the other hand, however,

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.07.13 2018고단1114

-광주지방법원 2018.11.14 2018노2361

-광주지방법원 2016.08.31 2016고단690

-창원지방법원 거창지원 2016.07.13 2016고단130

-울산지방법원 2018.09.11 2018고단528