beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.
Defendant
B shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months.
. Prosecutors;
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (as to occupational embezzlement), Y also knew that there was no business fund in the instant real estate development project, and the Defendant was promoting the project by paying business expenses, and there was no objection against the Defendant’s use of business expenses.
In addition, in promoting the development project, the Defendant repaid the amount of KRW 80 million to stop auction and made a verbal agreement on the benefits in advance. The Defendant’s payment of the money received was partially paid or repaid to the company, and the Defendant cannot be deemed as an occupational embezzlement, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
(2) In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case of unreasonable sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. As to this part of the facts charged by the prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (as to the acquittal of reasons among the facts charged of occupational embezzlement against Defendant B), the amount paid by the Defendant as employee salary was charged by excluding the amount damaged by the facts charged, and even though it is apparent that the above part was not used as employee salary, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
(2) In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case, each sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A: 4 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence, 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. Determination of the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by Defendant B (in relation to occupational embezzlement).