logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2016.09.08 2016고단490
횡령
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On January 27, 2016, the Defendant is a person who was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor and two years of suspended execution at the Chuncheon District Court on the grounds of fraud, etc. and on February 4, 2016, and such judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 18, 2013, the Defendant, while running a company established for the purpose of aggregate extraction business, entered into a contract with the network E managing the company D, a corporation, to have D extract aggregate from the Flcheon City and two parcels (hereinafter “instant aggregate extraction site”).

On January 9, 2014, the net E manufactured a new aggregate sorting machine at the instant aggregate extraction site and extracted aggregate on or around March 5, 2014. On or around July 9, 2014, it suspended the extraction of aggregate due to earth disease. On or around July 9, 2014, it transferred the above aggregate screening machine to G, the creditor of D, a corporation, for the repayment of debt.

On the other hand, on August 2014, the Defendant was notified by the victim of the acquisition of ownership of the aggregate selection machine, and the Defendant was required to keep the above aggregate screening machine for the victim by using the above aggregate screening machine.

On November 11, 2014, at the above aggregate extraction site, the Defendant did not notify the execution officer belonging to Chuncheon District Court of the fact that the above aggregate selection period was owned by the victim when executing the seizure of corporeal movables, such as the above aggregate screening machine, etc., at the request of H, a creditor of C, the above aggregate extraction site. The Defendant did not notify the victim of the seizure that the above seizure period was owned by the victim. The above aggregate screening period was executed by auction on December 16, 2012.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property amounting to KRW 119,800,000.

2. The principal agent of the crime of embezzlement shall be the person who holds the property of another person, and the custody here means the possession of the property by the consignment relationship. Thus, in order to establish the crime of embezzlement, the custodian of the property shall be the owner of the property.

arrow