logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2013.09.12 2013노2079
업무상횡령
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant shall pay 34,008,174 won to an applicant for compensation.

The above compensation order shall be.

Reasons

1. In light of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant is against the defendant and deposits for the victim, etc., the punishment of imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. A favorable circumstance is that the defendant's judgment on the defendant's assertion reflects the wrong and does not repeat the crime; that the defendant deposited 7 million won out of the embezzlement 41,008,174 won for the recovery of damage; that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment heavier than the suspended execution; that the defendant has a child to support the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is not adequate and the amount of embezzlement is not so considerable that the crime of this case is not good, and the victim wants to punish the defendant, and the fact that the defendant is still with previous fault is disadvantageous.

In full view of the above circumstances, such as the character, conduct, environment, etc. of the Defendant, the lower court appears to have taken into account most favorable circumstances, and there is no change in circumstances that would vary between the lower court and the sentence.

Therefore, since the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

3. The Defendant deposited KRW 7 million out of the amount embezzled in this case 41,008,174 won. The applicant sought a compensation order of KRW 34,008,174 in the remaining amount of damage. Thus, the Defendant rendered a decision as per Disposition in accordance with Articles 25(1)1 and 31(1) and (3) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

arrow