beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) C Apartment Family Film System (hereinafter “the film system of this case”) is mostly borne by the child-care center and the local child center, and the Defendant was liable to bear the cost.
In light of the fact that there is no evidence to ascertain the existence of a meeting of the representative meeting of lessees claiming that the above film exists, and the Defendant is irrelevant to the above film system, and the Defendant used the above film independently without going through any decision-making process and did not disclose the details of the use. In light of the fact that the Defendant sufficiently proves that he embezzled money for the film system for personal purposes by using the title of the support fund for the film system.
may be seen.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged is a person who, from June 4, 2012 to December 28, 2015, received inconvenience from occupants, such as the enactment and amendment of the apartment management rules, management fees, maintenance fees, maintenance and repair of common areas, ancillary facilities, etc. among the occupants of the building in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, the president of the lessee’s representative meeting. The Defendant is a person who performs duties, such as monitoring the appropriate use of management expenses of the apartment house controlled entity.
The Defendant, from October 2, 2015 to July of the same month, kept a total of KRW 1,50,000,000 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant bonus”) in the Saemaul Treasury Account in the name of the said apartment management office (hereinafter referred to as the “instant apartment account”) and in cash and in the name of supporting money for the film festivals held on the 8th of the same month, as shown in the list of crimes attached to the above apartment, from the above apartment merchants and financial institutions, for the sake of the occupants of the said apartment complex. The Defendant was on his/her business, who collected money from the Saemaul Treasury Account in the name of the said apartment management office (hereinafter referred to as the “instant account”), and was on his/her duty, from the said account as of October 13, 2015.