logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2016.08.19 2016고단528
횡령
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On October 13, 2014, the Defendant operated a DF rocketing car with a market price equivalent to KRW 25,979,091, which was owned by the Defendant, a victim lap Hashes Co., Ltd. (former KTren Co., Ltd.) that was leased from C in the name of C in the name of C, Sungnam-si (hereinafter referred to as the “Seongnam-si”).

Around August 2015, while the Defendant kept the said car on behalf of the Victim Haren Co., Ltd., the Defendant terminated the lending contract due to the unpaid rental fee, and even upon receiving a request to return the said car, the Defendant embezzled the said car by refusing to return the said car even though he was requested to return it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of each police officer against the defendant or C;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Investigation report (verification as to whether a vehicle is returned);

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on automobile lease agreement;

1. Article 355 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act include: (a) the Defendant continued to use the vehicle without returning the vehicle even though he received a request from the injured person to return the vehicle; (b) the Defendant transferred it to another person without returning it; (c) the damage was caused by the contact accident; (d) the Defendant did not make efforts to recover the damage; and (e) the Defendant did not make efforts to recover the damage; and (e) the unpaid siren amounting to KRW 16,764,00 that occurred after the Defendant was requested to return the vehicle; and (b) the siren amounting to KRW 6 million (750,000 that occurred after the Defendant was requested to return the vehicle among the unpaid siren amounting to KRW 16,764,00 that occurred due to embezzlement; and (c) the sentence identical to the order shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the favorable sentencing factors such as

arrow