(영문) 대구고등법원 2015.05.07 2014노555 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구고등법원 2015.05.07 2014노555

업무상횡령등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty in the reasoning of the judgment on the part that the Defendant voluntarily withdrawn and embezzled KRW 10 million as shown in the table of crime No. 3 in the judgment of the lower court, while managing the corporate account (K) in the name of the national bank in the name of H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”) on December 5, 201 (hereinafter “the changed name”) and keeping the company’s funds in business, and found the Defendant guilty of the remainder of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement), which is related to the crime of blanket.

However, the above judgment of the court below was appealed only by the defendant, and the prosecutor did not appeal.

Therefore, although the part of the judgment of the court below which was not guilty was judged in the trial, it should be viewed that it was exempted from the object of public defense among the parties, and this part is not determined again in accordance with the conclusion of the judgment of the court below.

Ultimately, the scope of the judgment of the court shall be limited to the conviction part of the judgment below.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The money deposited by the victim F in the Agricultural Cooperative passbook in the name of F that entrusted the Defendant with custody of the Defendant is funds invested by F in accordance with the Dong business contract with the Defendant. Since F entered into the above Dong business contract and the Defendant did not participate in the financial and accounting affairs of the Defendant, it should be deemed that F was entrusted with the Defendant with the right to use the entire deposit amount.

Therefore, even if the defendant used the above deposit for personal purpose, it does not constitute embezzlement.

B. It cannot be readily concluded that the sum totaling 86.5 million won of the facts charged is used for the personal purpose of the defendant, and the lower court did not have the prosecutor’s proof of the use of the said sum.

참조조문

-특정경제범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.11 2015노2848

-대구고등법원 2015.06.04 2014노737

-대구고등법원 2015.05.14 2014노720

-대구지방법원 2015.10.22 2014노2867

-대구고등법원 2015.04.23 2014노709