beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant only used the funds as entertainment expenses of the company with the approval of E, the representative director of the victim D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "victim Co., Ltd.") as entertainment expenses of the company, and since there was no embezzlement, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts, and that the punishment of
2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the Prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment to the effect that 900,000 won for embezzlement Nos. 1 870,000 among the facts charged at the trial of the lower court, 2,550,000 won for embezzlement Nos. 6-2,50,000 as of August 19, 201, and 280,470 won for embezzlement Nos. 6-280,470 won as of August 22, 201, respectively, and 80,470 won as of December 9, 201. Since the Prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment as of December 9, 2011, the lower court’s judgment was reversed because it was modified to this effect.
However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court despite the above reasons for reversal of facts in the judgment of the court below.
3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
A. If there is a lack of evidence to acknowledge that the defendant used funds in the use place claimed by the defendant, such as where the defendant did not properly explain his whereabouts or the use place, or it appears that the funds used in the use place claimed by the defendant were appropriated for funds other than the funds, even though the funds were withdrawn or used, it can be presumed that the defendant embezzled the funds as an intent to acquire unlawful profits, in the case where there is a lot of materials to prove that the defendant used funds for personal purposes.
However, the defendant is different from this.