logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.06.24 2014고정496
업무상횡령
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

From 2007 to 2012, the Defendant was the head of the forest room C Village, and D promised to construct the golf course to the company that operates the golf course in the vicinity of C Village, and to pay the full amount of C Village water supply charges by destroying the water source of C Village. D had the head of the village, who is the head of the village, requested the Defendant to pay C Village Water Supply Charges.

On December 2, 2007, the Defendant received 600,000 won from D in terms of the water supply rate and paid 447,260 won as the water supply rate, and if he/she left 152,740 won as the water supply rate, he/she has a duty to use it for C Village (Relocation E) which is the victim.

Nevertheless, while the Defendant was in custody of the remaining balance of 152,740 won after paying the water supply fee for the victim as the water supply fee for the victim, he/she embezzled by consuming the remaining balance of 152,740 won as living expenses according to the mind of the Defendant at the place of the pregnant room, etc. around that time, and in such a way, from March 2007 to March 2012, as shown in the annexed crime sight table, he/she used 37,200,000 won per month from D as the water supply fee for the period from March 207 to March 2012, and embezzled 24,184,910 won as the water supply fee, and used 13,015,090

Judgment

1. The main point of the Defendant’s argument D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) out of the 600,000 won monthly paid by the Defendant to the Defendant for the settlement of water supply charges for the pertinent month constitutes the ownership of the Defendant and thus constitutes a “other’s property” among the elements of embezzlement, and even if the above amount constitutes another’s property.

Even if the defendant was aware of his own ownership, there was no criminal intent of embezzlement.

In addition, the amount of embezzlement is more than the actual amount.

2. D Construction of a golf course as a company that operates a golf course in the vicinity of C Village, and destruction of the water source of C Village.

arrow