(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.01.10 2017노2200 | 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) 대전지방법원 2018.01.10 2017노2200

횡령

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant was operated by the victim to operate a cafeteria.

After taking over an E restaurant, it is merely a disposal of facilities and goods entered in the list of crimes established in the existing crime, while carrying out interior construction in line with a new type of business. The Defendant agreed to pay KRW 15 million to the victim. However, the Defendant merely agreed to pay the victim the amount of KRW 15 million for the transfer of a store called ‘sleep premium’, which does not constitute a payment for the said facilities and goods. The provisions on the reservation of ownership under Article 4 of the Agreement on the Transfer of Facilities and Rights are effective as the provisions incorporated regardless of the intention of the party.

It is also difficult to see it.

In addition, the above facilities and goods are equivalent to wastes, and the defendant disposes of them under the implied agreement with the victim.

Therefore, it cannot be said that the damage of property is established.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the Defendant asserted the same purport in the lower court’s judgment.

The lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, found the facts as indicated in its reasoning, and comprehensively taking account of the following facts, found the facts charged of the instant case guilty.

The defendant did not accept the above argument of the defendant.

① At the same time, the injured party received the full amount of the premium for facilities from the Defendant and agreed to transfer the transferred goods of this case to the Defendant, and the injured party agreed to lend the said goods to the Defendant up to the previous time, and it is reasonable to deem that the said goods were subject to a special agreement for the reservation of ownership.

(2) The defendant shall use any facilities and goods that he received from the injured party as his property.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2017.07.07 2016고정616

-청주지방법원 2018.10.11 2018노457

-대전지방법원 2020.02.12 2018가합104584

-대전고등법원 2020.08.27 2020나11436

-대전지방법원 2018.05.24 2017노3665