logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.09.15 2017노2360
업무상횡령
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court’s sentence (the suspended sentence of a fine of KRW 500,00) on the gist of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). According to the rules on the use of operating expenses of the resident representative meeting of the instant case, the lower court determined a punishment against the Defendant by taking account of the following: (a) the operating expenses of the resident representative meeting of the instant case are limited to the use; (b) the Defendant used the operating expenses of the resident representative meeting of the instant case in terms of encouragement for employees who conduct the management of the instant apartment of this case, not for personal use; (c) the sum of the amount is limited to KRW 3.6 million in total for two years; and (d) there was no history of

In addition to the above sentencing conditions, even if comprehensive consideration of all the sentencing conditions in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances after committing a crime, the lower court’s sentencing appears to have been conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion. There is no change in special circumstances that may be assessed differently from the sentencing conditions of the lower court up to the trial. Therefore, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is unfair because it is too uneasible

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

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow