logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2014.03.14 2013고단2844
업무상횡령
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From August 2009 to January 201, 2013, the Defendant: (a) had been in charge of accounting affairs in the “E”, the lessee of equipment for the operation of the victim D, which had been in the south-si city; (b) had been in charge of keeping and executing the company’s funds; and (c) had been transferred the company’s funds to the account in the name of FC, which is his/her care, and used them

Around January 14, 2010, the Defendant: (a) while keeping public funds on behalf of the said company for business purposes, remitted 280,000 won to the Nong Bank account in F’s name (Account Number G) and then used them as living expenses, etc.; and (b) total sum of 223,949,354 won from the above date and time to December 29, 2012, as shown in the List of Offenses, shall be deemed to be a clerical error, and thus, the national bank account in the facts charged of the Nong Bank account in F’s name shall be deleted.

The embezzlement was made in the manner of using it as living expenses, etc. after the remittance.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Attachment of the details of the police interrogation protocol to the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the police statement of H (attached to the account statement);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 356 of the Act on the Punishment of Criminal Crimes and Articles 355(1) of the Criminal Act (Optional to Imprisonment) lies in the previous case where the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment due to occupational embezzlement, etc. on December 2, 2004; the accounting staff has embezzled considerable amount of money for at least three years in the occupational trust; the Defendant wired embezzlement money to his/her account using Internet banking; the Defendant has failed to agree with the victim; the Defendant was unable to reach an agreement with the victim; and the Defendant has failed to recover from damage for more than one year since the embezzlement was revealed.

arrow