beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and four months, and by imprisonment with prison labor for a year.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court found the Defendants not guilty of the O-related embezzlement without making a specific judgment on the part of KRW 59 million, which the Defendants recognized as a U.S. intern, without strictly distinguishing between the Defendant’s obligations and the Defendant’s respective individual obligations, as well as the Defendant’s respective individual obligations. In addition, the lower court found the Defendants not guilty of the O-related embezzlement without making a specific judgment on the part of KRW 59 million, which the Defendants recognized as a U.S. intern.
The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles of the embezzlement case as the injured party, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. Of the facts charged in the instant case, part of the Defendants’ KRW 1-B, which was returned from Q, used for personal purposes.
Recognizing that some parts have been used for N.
Although the Defendants failed to submit the explanatory materials despite their assertion, the lower court, even if so, received a return of KRW 400,000,000 from Q.
Even if there is room to see that funds necessary for N’s operation are raised, the Defendants were acquitted on the embezzlement related to S Co., Ltd. (T prior to the change, hereinafter “S”) on the grounds that it is difficult to recognize the Defendants’ intent of unlawful acquisition.
The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to facts or embezzlement, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
(c)
Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court personally used KRW 350 million out of KRW 650,000,000,000 that Defendant A borrowed from X
Defendant A used the said money for N under the preceding paragraph, even if there is no evidence to reverse it, and under the preceding paragraph, Defendant A used it.