logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.08.23 2018고정308
횡령
Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On June 2, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of suspension of execution and a fine of ten million won in the Seoul Central District Court on October 10, 2017, and the above judgment was finalized on June 10, 2017. On January 31, 2018, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced 10 months of imprisonment and fine of ten million won on April 27, 2018.

[2] Around June 13, 2016, the Defendant entered into a car lease contract on the condition of the lease term of 60 months, deposit amount of 10,980,000 won, monthly lease fee of 670,000 won, which is owned by the said victim, at the office of Hanri-ri, Inc., Ltd. located in 177, Dong-dong, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, on the condition of the lease term of 60 months, deposit amount of 10,980,000 won, monthly lease amount of 670,000 won. While receiving the said car from the injured person and keeping the said car for the injured person, the Defendant refused to terminate the said car lease contract for consecutive reasons from April 17, 2017 to receive the notification of the termination of the lease contract and the return of the automobile owned by the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquire about criminal history;

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting a crime (Selection of a punishment);

1. The concurrent crime processing (the crime that became final and conclusive as of April 27, 2018 between the judgment rendered as of June 10, 2017 and the crime that became final and conclusive as of April 27, 2018, is a crime after June 10, 2017 as of the date the judgment was rendered as of June 2, 2017. Thus, the crime of this case, which was a crime before June 10, 2017, cannot be deemed to have been adjudicated simultaneously with the crime of this case, which was a crime before June 10, 2017. As such, in relation to the final and conclusive judgment on April 27, 2018, the concurrent crime under Article 39(1) of the Criminal

Article 37 of the Criminal Code, but Article 39 of the Criminal Code.

arrow