logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.07.13 2018고단284
업무상횡령
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From early December 2, 2016 to November 201, 2017, the Defendant served as a business member of the victim C limited liability company in Bapo-si B, and was engaged in the delivery of alcoholic beverages and the collection of alcoholic beverage bills.

On February 1, 2017, the Defendant collected KRW 390,000 alcoholic beverages from E cafeteria located in Sinpo City D for the victim company and embezzled them for personal purposes around that time by arbitrarily using them for the victim company. From November 12, 2017, the Defendant collected alcoholic beverages of KRW 39,065,047 in total over 179 times until November 12, 2017, as shown in the List of Offenses, and used them for the victim company’s personal purposes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint, a report on investigation (a list of suspect agricultural accounts attached), and a report on investigation (a correction of a list of crimes)

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of criminal facts;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Where the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act [the scope of recommendation] [the grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code / [the scope of punishment under 100 million won] (one month to October] mitigation area (the person subject to special mitigation], the amount of punishment of this case is not so significant], but the amount of the embezzlement of this case is not so significant. However, the defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime, confession and reflects the crime of this case, and agreed with the victim, and all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records, including the fact that the defendant has agreed with the victim,

arrow