logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2020.10.20 2020고정102
업무상횡령
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From November 2016 to April 30, 2017, the Defendant engaged in the business of manufacturing special motor vehicles with the trade name of “D” between Jincheon-gun Factory B 150 to Jincheon-gun Factory B, Jincheon-gun, 2017.

From November 25, 2016 to April 30, 2017, the Defendant embezzled KRW 19,662,309, total sum of the fund of the same business that he/she kept and managed in each account in the name of the Nonghyup Bank (F), the name of the Defendant SC Bank (G), the H Nong Bank (I), and the H Bank (J) as indicated in the attached list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The third police interrogation protocol of the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant in the witness C, and the application of the Act and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (attached to the suspect's embezzlement table);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution is that the defendant used the business fund for a private purpose or arbitrarily withdraws the business fund, and even if the defendant was unable to explain his/her whereabouts or location, or where it appears that the funds used in the defendant's claim are appropriated for other funds, it can be inferred that the defendant embezzled the above funds with the intent of unlawful acquisition if there are insufficient materials to prove that the defendant used the funds for the personal purpose.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do457 delivered on March 14, 2000, etc.). Such embezzlement was embezzled, and the sum of the amount of the embezzlement is not small, and thus, the quality of the crime of this case is less than that of the crime.

provided, however, that it is a partnership;

arrow