logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2013.10.24 2013고단1253
횡령
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for nine months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant had been supplied with the original body from around September 28, 2012 by the victim E while operating a d company with the trade name “D company” in Speaker-si, and had supplied it to the victim.

On January 5, 2013, the Defendant arbitrarily disposed of Chapter 15,381 (the victim’s reported price: KRW 7,000 per piece of supply per piece of delivery; KRW 107,667,00) on the part of the victim, which was produced at the above factory of the Defendant, and embezzled Chapter 15,381 on the part of the Defendant, by selling to F at least KRW 15 million, while keeping the market price in custody for the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Witnesses G and E respective legal statements;

1. Statement E and G among the police interrogation protocol Nos. 2 and 3 of the accused (Evidence List No. 9, 15);

1. Statement G among the interrogation protocol of the fourth police officer against the accused (No. 17 of the evidence list);

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A H company and a D company transaction abstract (No. 16 of the evidence list);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of summary of transaction (No. 18 of the evidence list) in the G production;

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion of imprisonment selective selective choice of punishment, and the defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion on this issue, asserts that embezzlement is not established since he/she disposes of the victim's custody of the defendant while the defendant was not paid the processing expenses, and thus, it would be appropriate to cover the processing expenses.

However, according to the aforementioned evidence, the Defendant and the defense counsel were paid approximately KRW 46.59 million for the clinical processing cost that the Defendant had to receive as of December 25, 2012, immediately before the instant crime, while the Defendant’s clinical processing cost that the Defendant paid to the Defendant is about KRW 69.9 million. Thus, the Defendant was receiving approximately KRW 23 million for the clinical processing cost of the place of the instant embezzlement. Thus, the Defendant was above the Defendant and the defense counsel.

arrow