beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, including the victim E’s statement with credibility of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant received 100P from the injured party for simple storage and stored for the injured party can be sufficiently recognized.
Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge it. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles.
2. On September 20, 2012, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant listened to the statement that there is a dispute over certain business activities with F from the victim E in Busan Gangseo-gu, Busan, about September 20, 201; (b) “F 100P, and, at any time, would be kept in his/her office open room and brought about at the time because he/she may do so; and (c) the Defendant refused to return the statement on the ground that F 10P from the beginning of October of the same year to the victim, who received 13:00P around 13:00 of the same month from the victim and kept for the victim, even though he/she was demanded by the victim to return the above 100P from the first day of the same year to the victim.
3. The lower court determined that the victim E entered into a free storage agreement with the victim on the ground that the victim E jointly operated G with F, and that “the Defendant’s debt to G was equivalent to KRW 4.4 million at the time of the instant case,” and that the victim was jointly and severally liable to the Defendant as a partner, despite the fact that the victim was jointly and severally liable to the Defendant at the time of the instant case, the Defendant entered into a free storage agreement with F on the victim and F’s business property.
It is difficult to see that there was a storage of 100P, instead, as alleged by the Defendant, of the said joint and several liability security.
If the defendant keeps 100P to secure the above joint and several obligations, it is somewhat doubtful whether the establishment procedure of the pledge is legitimate or not.