logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2016.10.07 2016고단862
횡령
Text

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A as the vice president of D, the injured party E, a person who entered into a subcontract agreement for civil engineering works among the F New Construction Works in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul, the injured party E, and performed civil engineering works at the same place, and Defendant B is a person who was in office as the head of the above field office.

1. The Defendants conspired with the Defendants on September 3, 2014, and embezzled the said steel bars, the ownership of the victim company, by arbitrarily using them at the scene of the H new construction work in Pyeongtaek-gun in Gangwon-do, the other site of D, and then arbitrarily using them at the scene of the new construction work in Pyeongtaek-gun, the other site of D, thereby making it difficult for the Defendants to use the said steel bars, which is owned by the victim company.

2. Around April 16, 2015, Defendant B’s sole criminal conduct (Fraud) made a false statement with the victim G that “A re-issuance of a tax invoice canceled by Company D with the tax invoice that was issued by Company D and the said tax invoice was re-issued.”

However, even though the above money was received from the victim, there was no intention or ability to make a tax invoice again issued by D corporation.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 3,480,000 from the victim under the pretext of the iron bars around April 20, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Defendant B’s partial statement

1. Witnesses G and I's respective legal statements;

1. Protocol concerning the interrogation of the Defendants by the prosecution

1. Each investigation report (including attached documents) stating that the victim and I will be issued a tax invoice cancelled in D even though the defendant B agreed to receive the non-repaid amount after the completion of defect repair between the defendant B and I.

arrow