(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.01.24 2017노5564 | 리걸엔진

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) 수원지방법원 2018.01.24 2017노5564

업무상횡령

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the injured party C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd”) filed a lawsuit against the Defendant in China court seeking confirmation of ownership of D 802 U.S. Republic of China (hereinafter “the real estate of this case”); (b) the Chinese court confirmed that the ownership of the real estate of this case was the victim company; and (c) the judgment of the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case with the purport of denying the victim company’s ownership of the real estate of this case; and (d) otherwise, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles

2. Determination

A. A. An ex officio determination prosecutor shall reach the judgment of the court below, and shall retain the facts charged as to the occupational embezzlement, which was found not guilty at the court below, and shall not be held as follows 2:

C. (1) The facts charged as to the act of occupational breach of trust as stated in Paragraph (1) are added to the facts charged, and the applicable law added "Article 356 and Article 355 (2) of the Criminal Act" to "Article 356 and Article 355 (2) of the Criminal Act," and this court was subject to the trial by permitting it.

In the following, the grounds for appeal against the primary facts charged by the prosecutor and the ancillary facts added in the trial of the party are examined in order.

B. In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the primary facts charged is justified. The court below's finding the primary facts charged as a case where there is no proof of criminal facts as to the primary facts charged is just and acceptable. There is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles as

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

(c)

(1) On December 2002, 2002, the summary of the facts charged in the preliminary charge is determined by the Defendant.

참조조문

-형법 제355조 제2항

-형법 제356조

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2018.12.07 2018노1276

-창원지방법원 2018.11.21 2018노1324

-청주지방법원 2018.09.21 2018노138

-전주지방법원 2018.05.18 2018노246

-청주지방법원 2018.07.20 2017노1332