logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.04.03 2017고단2947
횡령
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and by imprisonment for four months.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 19, 2016, the Defendants recommended the victim E at the Daegu Geum-dong branch of the Daegu Geum-dong Bank from the Daegu Geum-dong to make an investment of KRW 200 million by combining the Defendants’ investment amount of KRW 50 million, KRW 200 million, and KRW 200 million, and KRW 300 million, KRW 300,000,000 to the Defendant’s name. Defendant A received KRW 200,000 from the damaged party on the same day, and transferred the said KRW 200,000,000 to the Defendant’s name on the same day.

On July 14, 2016, the Defendants conspired to return KRW 20 million to the Agricultural Cooperative Account (Account Number H) in the name of Defendant B, on the ground that the victim B was urgently required to pay money at a place where it is unknown, and the Defendants embezzled the said money by using it for personal purposes, such as voluntary repayment of debt at around that time.

2. Defendant A (Embezzlement of Investment Proceeds) received KRW 180,00,000 from F as dividend for the said victim’s E-investment in a place where it is impossible to identify the place on September 9, 2016, the Defendant received KRW 1,80,00 from F as dividend on September 12, 2016, the Defendant received KRW 150,000 from F as dividend.

After 10,000 won was remitted, the remaining 30,000 won was not returned to the victim, but returned individually.

On October 31, 2016, the Defendant continued to receive KRW 70,000 from F as dividend at a place where it is difficult to identify the place of light or light on October 31, 2016, but received KRW 50,000 from the victim as dividend on the same day.

After 50,000 won was remitted, the remaining 20,000 won was not returned to the victim, but returned individually.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled 50 million won in total of the victim's investment profits.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant in the first trial record;

arrow