beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
From March 31, 2009 to March 2014, the Defendant served as the Elocker in the operation of the Victim D Co., Ltd. in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, and has been engaged in the management of the said hotel’s direct coffee sales, cash sales, corporate passbook, corporate passbook, corporate card, etc.
1. The Defendant’s occupational embezzlement: (a) based on the fact that he/she is delegated with the business of receiving cash sales from the hotel hotel or the receipt and withdrawal of cash sales in the coffee shop and manages the corporate account (F) by delegation; (b) based on the fact that the disbursement resolution or disbursement confirmation procedure is not close, he/she withdraws cash from the passbook of the above corporation as the business operation expenses of the company; and (c) only some of the amount is used as the corporate operating expenses; and (d) he/she
From January 1, 201 to January 31, 2011, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 36,886,076 as the corporate operating expenses from the said corporate account, and used KRW 7,714,787,00 among them as the purchase cost, oil price, service price, etc. for the company, and used the remainder of KRW 29,171,289 for personal purposes, such as one’s own living expenses, entertainment expenses, and repayment of loans, and used the remainder of KRW 29,179 for personal purposes. As indicated in attached Table 1, as indicated in attached Table 1, the Defendant consumed KRW 381,159,385, which was withdrawn from the corporate account from January 1, 201 to March 2014, in the amount of KRW 152,547,588, which was equivalent to the difference obtained from the corporate account for the personal purpose of the Defendant.
Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim D's property.
2. On August 2, 2012, the Defendant in occupational breach of trust uses the said corporate card only for expenses incurred in operating the hotel in line with the purpose of the management of the corporate card with delegation of accounting duties from the victim corporation D, but, on August 2, 2012, the Defendant used the corporate card to pay for the Defendant’s own car using the corporate card (H) in violation of the above occupational duties at the center of the corporation corporation.