logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2018.07.20 2018노98
업무상횡령등
Text

Defendant

All appeals filed by A, B, and C and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A, B, C (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of legal principles) 1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as stated in the instant facts charged. However, the instant subsidy is not a strictly limited subsidy, in particular, since the Defendants used the subsidy only for the public in relation to G Games, etc., which is the relevant event, and thus, used the subsidy for any purpose other than its original purpose.

shall not be deemed to exist.

② Since all of the money returned from the business partner was deposited in the official passbook of the Association and used only for public purposes, the above Defendants did not have any intention to obtain unlawful profits from the said Defendants.

③ Since the embezzlement of public funds as indicated in the attached list of crimes Nos. 2 was used for public purposes in relation to the federation’s event, etc., there was no intent to acquire unlawful profits from the above Defendants.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which found all of the charges of this case guilty on different premises, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court (Defendant A: a fine of KRW 4 million, Defendant B, and C: each fine of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence against the Defendants (in the case of Defendant A, B, and C) (the same as the above stated, Defendant D: fine of one million won, and two years of suspended execution) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination as to the misapprehension of legal principles and mistake of facts by Defendant A, B, and C

A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) Defendant A, B, and C was in office as the president of the E Federation from January 2015 and was in general in charge of the management, execution, and settlement of the subsidies association membership fees, etc.; and (b) Defendant B, from January 2015 to January 2015, was in office as the president of the E Federation and was in office as the secretary of the said Federation, managed and executed the subsidies association membership fees, etc.

arrow