logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.09.30 2016노718
업무상횡령
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal was that the Defendant subscribed to savings insurance and paid the long-term repair allowances, the use of which is strictly limited, as insurance money.

As a result, if the long-term repair allowance is used by terminating the future insurance contract even during the middle of the insurance contract, there is a risk that the loss of principal will occur to the occupants.

In addition, as the defendant bought such insurance, the husband of the defendant received allowances as an insurance designer, and the defendant himself was able to escape the insurance money at the time of his injury or death, so that the defendant or the legal person of the defendant may escape from the insurance money.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby finding the Defendant not guilty.

2. In light of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Act on Housing, etc., the reserve fund for long-term excursion ships shall be collected, accumulated, and managed separately from management expenses, etc. for the special purpose of repairing the section for common use of multi-family housing, and may be used only for the maintenance and repair of the section for common use as determined by the long-term repair plan, and the fund shall be strictly limited until the time of disbursement so that it can be executed after

The act of the Defendant, who is the president of the tenant representative meeting, paid a long-term repair reserve that has to be bound to be bound for a long-term period of four years without a special resolution of the occupants. The act of the Defendant, who is the president of the tenant representative meeting, can not use the long-term repair reserve when the use of the long-term repair reserve is necessary, or may cause the risk of principal loss even if it is terminated or used with the loan of the insurance premium, and it is obviously inappropriate.

However, even if the defendant paid the long-term repair reserve as the savings insurance money, the person to whom the mid-term refund or the maturity refund belongs is the representative of the occupants.

arrow