logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.15 2017노112
횡령등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Comprehensively taking account of the fact that the victim F and G paid monthly electricity and water rates to the Defendant, and consistently stated that there was no settlement between the Defendant and the Defendant, and other submitted evidence, the fact that the Defendant received electricity and water rates from the victims as stated in the facts charged and used them at will is sufficiently recognized.

B. H and F consistently denies the fact that the name of the holder of the contract for lease on the part of the use of a private document forgery or the use of the document for the above investigation is the nominal owner of the contract for lease, and there is no evidence to prove that each contract for lease has been duly prepared. Therefore, the Defendant is recognized to forge and use each

(c)

According to the statement of business interference F andO, and the statement of the fact-finding letter about lessees of the building in this case, the defendant suspended the operation of the elevator.

2. Determination

A. The lower court deemed that there is insufficient evidence to prove that the Defendant embezzled electricity and water rates paid by the victims, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated, based on the following facts and circumstances: (a) and comprehensively taking account of such facts and circumstances as indicated in its reasoning; and (b)

On the other hand, the defendant was acquitted.

A thorough examination of the evidence of this case in light of the records reveals that the court below's determination of not guilty on the basis of the fact finding and judgment as above is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts as pointed out by the prosecutor.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

B. The lower court acknowledged the facts and circumstances as indicated in its reasoning based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated, and comprehensively taking account of such facts and circumstances into account, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated.

arrow