(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.01.21 2014고단3152

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.01.21 2014고단3152

횡령

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 26, 2013, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., which is located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, with the amount of lease of KRW 35,610,00, monthly rent of KRW 800,100, monthly rent of KRW 60 months, and received the said car from the victim around that time.

The Defendant and the victim agreed to the effect that “the ownership of the leased motor vehicle shall be owned by the financial company, and the customer shall have the right to use the motor vehicle only, and where the customer has continuously delayed monthly rent for at least two months, the financial company may terminate the contract and claim the return of the motor vehicle.” Thus, during the lease period, the victim had the ownership of the motor vehicle.

While the Defendant kept a car for the victim, from January 2014, the victim did not pay the agreed rent to the victim, and the victim notified the Defendant that the above lease contract would be terminated on or around March 5, 2014, the Defendant demanded the return of the said car.

Although the Defendant received a request from the victim to return the said car, the Defendant refused to return the said car without any justifiable reason and embezzled the said car with which the market price is unknown.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial entry of the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Written complaint, and D's voluntary statement;

1. A criminal investigation report (D telephone conversations for reference) and an investigation report (report on impossibility to contact a suspect);

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the financial situation of the construction cost that the defendant had not received while paying the normal lease fee is light, and that the lease fee was not paid and that there was no intention of embezzlement.

The Court has duly adopted and investigated the case.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2016.04.21 2015고단5446

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.23 2017가단5100430

-인천지방법원 2019.09.25 2019고단5006

-대전지방법원 2019.02.20 2018고단1601

-광주지방법원 2015.12.18 2015고단3273