logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2018.06.22 2017고합90
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)
Text

The punishment of the accused shall be three years of imprisonment.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 20, 1972, the injured party B was a clan of the Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Nam, and E (hereinafter "the real estate of this case") was divided into D on September 5, 2015.

The defendant, as the representative of the victim clan, was engaged in the management of the real estate of this case for the victim's clan, and was owned by F, which was the money of the defendant before the real estate became owned by the victim's clan, so it was sold on the ground that F, his descendants, the defendant's living G, etc. had a real right to do so, and the money was used by the defendant and the defendant's religious system.

Accordingly, on June 26, 2015, the Defendant transferred the instant real estate in KRW 882,500,000 to J and K, and transferred the ownership on March 16, 2016 at the office of “I real estate” located in H, Nam-si, Nam-si.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the property that he kept on duty for the victim's life.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of a witness, L, N, orO;

1. A protocol (two times) concerning the examination of the suspect of the police against the accused, and a protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the accused;

1. Application of the investigative report (related to submission of documents evidencing L evidence), certified copy of the register, minutes, land transaction contracts, clan rules, the 26th descendants' articles of association, and the statutes of the 26th general meeting;

1. The judgment of the defendant and his defense counsel on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Article 356 of the Criminal Act, Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act regarding the crime of this case is to the purport that the real estate of this case, unlike the ownership on the register of the real estate of this case, is the real estate owned by the defendant, who is substantially limited to the defendant's money F, and the defendant did not have any intention to embezzlement it since there was no dispute within the victim

arrow