beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant embezzled fuel support funds worth KRW 720,000 on January 1, 2012, KRW 270,000 on April 5, 2012, and KRW 625,00 on April 19, 2012.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous and erroneous.
B. The sentencing of the lower court on the grounds that the sentencing of an unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 1.5 million) is too unjustifiable.
2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, while serving as the general secretary of the Chungcheongnam-gun Village from July 2008 to July 2013, 2013, kept the public funds of the village and the public funds of the D senior citizens for business purposes. While depositing the oil support fund received in the future from the Seocheon-gun Office in the agricultural cooperative account in the name of the Defendant, he/she had the non-resident purchase oil on credit from the G gas station located in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Seocheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and he/she embezzled the oil amount of KRW 720,00 won on January 1, 2012 in a manner that the Defendant paid the oil value with the oil support fund and arbitrarily collected the oil value from the purchaser of the oil, he/she embezzled the oil support fund in the aggregate of KRW 1,615,00 won on April 19, 2012 by using the oil value at his/her discretion.
B. The judgment of the court below 1) The evidence that corresponds to the defendant's above 1,615,00 won was returned from the residents to the investigation agency after the approval of the price for the purchase of the oil by residents in the village was made instead of the price for the purchase of the oil by residents as stated in the facts charged is not consistent, and the defendant asserts that he was actually used in the center for older persons through a self-written statement, etc. while making a statement on this part. The court below stated that the defendant continued to use the above amount in the center for older persons. The witness of the court of first instance, who is operating the station for older persons, has received money by the method specified in the facts charged, has been supplied to the center for older persons in 2012.