logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.11.20 2014고단2097
업무상횡령
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is a person who has served as the head of E’s business, a food material supplier of the victim C’s operation.

From January 1, 2012, the Defendant, from around 2010 to around 1, 2010, was serving as an employee with a monthly salary of 1.5 million won. From around January 1, 2012, the Defendant received goods on credit from the said company and supplied them to the company as a customer, such as large-scale discount stores, Schlages, etc., and decided to deposit money received from large-scale discount stores, etc., and the Defendant would pay the difference between the amount deposited at the end of the month and the amount of credit goods and pay the amount of money exceeding 2

Nevertheless, from January 1, 2012 to April 30, 2013, the Defendant released goods equivalent to KRW 295,891,656 from the said company to the trading company, supplied the goods to the said company, and received the payment from the trading company for the said company for the said company, the Defendant paid only KRW 233,191,295 to the said company, and used the difference as living expenses at will without paying KRW 62,70,361.

As a result, the Defendant embezzled 62,70,361 won of the victim's money stored in business.

2. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the price of goods that the defendant received from the customer is not established for embezzlement because the defendant is not in the position of the person who is in custody for the victim as the owner of the defendant.

The following facts and circumstances revealed according to the evidence adopted by the court below. ① The Defendant entered into a so-called incentive system (hereinafter “instant agreement”) from January 1, 2012 when the Defendant was employed by the victim and engaged in the delivery and collection of goods, and supplied goods to the major retail outlet, Schlage, etc. where the victim’s transaction partner was previously supplied with goods. ② According to the instant agreement, the Defendant supplied goods on credit from the victim and supplied them to the major retail outlet, Schlage, etc.

arrow