logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2013.10.30 2013노297
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The sentence of the court below against the defendants (the defendant A: two years of imprisonment, and the defendant B: one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the Defendants were in profoundly against their mistake, agreed upon by all the Defendants, paid a considerable amount of money to the victim for the recovery of damage, in particular, Defendant A sold real estate for the recovery of damage, provided retirement allowances, and did not have the same criminal record to the Defendants.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendants were arbitrarily disposed of by reducing the products of the victim company for several years using their status and work experience in the victim company, and the nature of the crime is inferior, and the amount of embezzlement exceeds 2.2 billion won, and even if the Defendants were to consider the amount deposited in the victim company or the amount of money and security provided for the recovery of damage, etc., the crime of this case appears to exceed 80 million won, a sentence of punishment against the Defendants is inevitable.

In addition, in the case of Defendant B, in light of the fact that the sentence imposed by the court below is the lowest sentence of punishment imposed by discretionary mitigation, and the relationship with the victim company in the case of Defendant A, the specific details of the act performed and the importance of the whole crime, etc., it seems that the degree of contribution to the crime is more likely to be higher than Defendant B, and in full view of the various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, home environment, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion of unreasonable sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow