logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2012.12.20 2012고합434
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From February 11, 1996 to November 14, 1999, the Defendant, as the president of the Korea Credit Union established in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, has overall control over credit business, such as the receipt of deposits from members of the Korea Credit Union, loans to members, and safekeeping of securities for its members. From November 15, 1999, the said president’s duties were suspended upon an order issued by the officers of the Korea Credit Union issued by the Korea Credit Union Federation, but in fact, the Defendant continued to perform the said duties, but had left China for the purpose of escaping criminal punishment due to occupational embezzlement, etc. on September 25, 200 and was arrested on August 19, 2012.

1. Around July 7, 1998, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) requested the termination of the regular deposit amounting to KRW 20 million deposited by the victim E in the office of the victim Dcredit Cooperatives in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government for the victim association, and collected the money from the victim association and consumed it by the Defendant’s personal debt repayment, etc. around that time.

In addition, from that time until September 9, 2000, the Defendant embezzled the sum of KRW 631,358,000 from the victim’s union at will, as shown in the list of offenses, by arbitrarily withdrawing 631,358,000 from the victim union on 16 occasions, and by consuming the Defendant’s personal debt, etc. around that time.

2. Around May 25, 1998, the criminal defendant against the victim F made a false statement to the victim F at the above D Credit Union Office (hereinafter “FF) that “AF would receive a loan from a union, and would normally repay a joint and several guarantee loan from a union, and the victim would not be absolutely damaged.”

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the full amount of the loan in the name of G who did not fully meet the loan conditions.

The defendant deceivings the victim and is under his control.

arrow