logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.01.20 2014고단2018
업무상횡령
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and by imprisonment with prison labor for a year.

provided that this ruling has become final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A A entered into a mobile phone sales contract with the victim Lee-do Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "victim Co., Ltd.") located in Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Cheongju, 2009, and from that time until December 2012, 201, he/she operated F among the E agencies from Daejeon Dong-gu, Daejeon to December 2, 201. Defendant B was employed as an employee of the said F from September 201 to December 201, and G was a member of the victimized company, who was engaged in the management of the said F from September 201 to July 31, 2012.

The Defendants prepared an application for opening of a false mobile phone with G, and then received a mobile phone from the victimized company as if they opened the normal mobile phone and embezzled it. G provided false personal information to the nominal owner who will open the mobile phone, disposed of the embezzled mobile phone terminal, the Defendants were in charge of performing the work necessary for opening the normal mobile phone using the above personal information, and performing the work of creating a telephone force in order not to indicate that it is a false opening.

around August 2, 2012, in collusion with G, the Defendants prepared an application for opening a false mobile phone in the H’s name using the H’s personal information provided by G while in the course of performing duties for the purpose of selling the mobile phone which is the owner of the victimized company, and embezzled by arbitrarily disposing of 110 mobile phones totaling KRW 109,43,500 from the above date to December 4, 2012, as shown in the list of crimes in the separate sheet, as if he/she opened a normal mobile phone, and as if he/she opened a normal mobile phone, he/she got G to possess one of the three mobile phones equivalent to KRW 904,200 at the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Witnesses G, I, .

arrow