beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
On June 3, 201, the Defendant entered into a contract for the lease of facilities with the Plaintiff Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. (State) in the name of the land B, which was operated by the Plaintiff at the time of March 3, 2011, and thereafter, entered into a contract for the lease of facilities with the Defendant at the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”), and kept one car for the Cub in D in the market value of KRW 86,800,000, which is the victim’s possession, delivered by the victim company at around that time, and paid rent remaining after succession to the said contract from B. However, on June 201, the Defendant arbitrarily set it out to E as the collateral for the bond at a non-permanent place.
Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.
Judgment
A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it is recognized that the Defendant paid rent on behalf of B while using the instant vehicle in delivery from B due to the same circumstance as the facts charged, and offered the said vehicle as security to E on June 2013.
B. However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, i.e., the Defendant did not perform the procedure of succession to rights and obligations between Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. at the time of delivery of the said car from B, and as the Defendant failed to pay the above lease fees, Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. terminated the facility lease contract against B and requested the return of the said car. However, B failed to return the said car, and B was pronounced guilty on the Defendant on January 16, 2014 with regard to the delivery of the said car to the Defendant, which was sentenced to the Defendant for four months by imprisonment with prison labor (Embezzlement 3031, the embezzlement of 2013 Goman, which was the first 3031, the crime of embezzlement). The facts of the above A are alone, at the time of the Defendant’s delivery of the instant car to E, the Defendant kept the said car in custody for the modern Capital Co., Ltd.
It is insufficient to view it and there is no other evidence to prove it.
In conclusion, the facts charged against the defendant are a crime.