logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 마산지원 2014.05.21 2014고단338
업무상횡령
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, from January 28, 2010 to June 21, 2011, was engaged in the business of property and fund management of the said company as the representative director of the (State)C located in Gyeong-gun, G, and Dong.

On May 25, 2011, the Defendant: (a) at the office of the said state office, for the land D, 165 million won of the maximum debt amount; (b) for the land owned by the said State; (c) for the F, the amount of KRW 95 million of the maximum debt amount; and (d) for G, the amount of KRW 75 million of the maximum debt amount; and (c) for the said company’s personal use, the Defendant was transferred from the said F to the account under the name of A representative director of the said State; and (d) for the said company, the Defendant used KRW 205,620,066 of the said amount for the said company’s personal use, such as the cost of developing the land owned by the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of H;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reporting;

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts: Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution: Determination in consideration of the grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommending punishment] types 2 (10 million won to less than 50 million won) (6-2 years) (special mitigations] where the degree of violation of duties is insignificant (the decision of sentence] 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution does not directly have to be returned to the defendant himself/herself, but rather, the fact that the defendant was deemed to have committed the instant crime on behalf of the victimized company, and the fact that

arrow