(영문) 전주지방법원 2014.12.23 2014고단1078

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) 전주지방법원 2014.12.23 2014고단1078

횡령

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Around August 30, 2011, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement on the condition that “The vehicle or right shall not be transferred, sub-lease, pledged, pledged, or created mortgage without the consent of the lessee company” with respect to the vehicle of KRW 60,790,000 in the name of the limited liability company, which is a price of KRW 1,268,01,00,000, in the name of the victim Eurgian Co., Ltd., a limited liability company and the limited liability company of KRW 60,790,00,00, in the name of the victim Eurgian Co., Ltd., for 40,000,000 in the lease period, and embezzled the said vehicle by means of the last vehicle delivery to D by receiving KRW 4,00,000 from D around March 2013.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding E;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A report on investigation (the contents of DNA conversations for reference);

1. Calculation of the amount of damage and the application of statutes;

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 355 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. In light of the circumstances and methods of the instant crime committed by taking advantage of the following facts: (a) the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc., concluded a lease contract with a due lease company and disposed of and embezzled to another lease company, the owner of the vehicle; and (b) it is difficult to view that the relevant vehicle was not returned to the leased company that suffered damage or used in compliance with the purpose of the lease contract after the closing of argument in the instant case; and (c) it is difficult to view that the circumstances after the instant crime are also good; (d) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime on the premise that there is no problem if the lease fee is paid normally as the site of law, such as the legal nature of the lease contract.

참조조문

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 군산지원 2021.04.21 2020고단1412

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.18 2018가단5021329

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.09.18 2018가단5237124

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.03.20 2013가합507868

-전주지방법원 2015.04.17 2014고단1620