2010 Highest 570 Occupational embezzlement

1. "Drieds" (************************) and non-permanent workers.

Housing Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

2. The term "maths" (**********************)***) and rest area business 00

Seo-gu Daejeon apartment complex common

OLE in the area of the Gyeongbuk-gun, Gyeongbuk-gun, the place of registration

3 . " 송병정 " ( * * * * * * - * * * * * * * ) , ♧♧♤♤주유소장

Seo-gu Daejeon apartment unit in Seo-gu, Daejeon

【Rescare-gun Myeonkdong-gun

4 . " 이정 " ( * * * * * * - * * * * * * * ) , BB♤♤휴게소장

Housing Dong-dong Apartment-dong, Daejeon

Gwangju Dong-gu in Reference domicile II

Maximum leapscopes

Attorney Jeong Jin-jin (hereinafter referred to as "defendant")

Attorney Song-soo et al. (for defendant Lee Byung-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

June 10, 2010

Defendant 1’s Defendant 1’s imprisonment with prison labor for one year, Defendant 2’s “Pest illness” for “B,” and Defendant 2’s “Pest illness” for “B”

"A person shall be punished by a fine of 4,000,000 won, respectively.

Defendant’s “A period of 50,000 won converted into one day if this fine is not paid.”

Defendant 1’s “A” is confined in a workhouse.

Defendant 1 for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive

The execution of each penalty shall be suspended.

Defendant 2’s “A” order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

Facts of crime

1. Defendants’ occupational status

Defendant 1 “A expressway operated by the Victim Veterans Association of the Republic of Korea (a corporation established by the Korean Veterans Association Act) from August 1, 2001 to May 6, 2009 for profit-making business.

♧♧♤♤ 휴게소 및 주유소 , ♡□□ 휴게소 및 주유소를 관리 · 총괄하는 고속도로 휴 게소 사업000으로 근무하면서 위 휴게소 등의 관리감독 , 인사 , 행정 , 회계 등 제반 업무를 총괄하는 지위에 있었다 . 피고인 " 최을병 " 은 2001 . 8 . 1 . 경부터 위 사업본부 ✨

★으로 , 2006 . 8 . 1 . 경부터 전무로 , 2009 . 5 . 7 . 경부터 사업000으로 근무하면서 위 휴게소 등의 관리감독 , 인사 , 행정 , 회계 등 제반 업무를 총괄하는 지위에 있다 . 피 고인 " 송병정 " 은 2003 . 11 . 1 . 경부터 2008 . 6 . 30 . 경까지 사이에 ♡□□ 휴게소장으로 근무하면서 ♡O▣ 휴게소의 관리감독 , 인사 , 행정 , 회계 등 제반 업무를 총괄하는 지 위에 있었다 . 피고인 " 이정 " 은 2008 . 7 . 1 . 경부터 BBQ♤ 휴게소장으로 근무하면서 BB♤♤ 휴게소의 관리감독 , 인사 , 행정 , 회계 등 제반 업무를 총괄하는 지위에 있다 . 피고인들은 위와 같은 직에 근무하면서 개인활동비 등이 모자라자 위 각 휴게소 및 주유소 운영비로 보관하던 돈을 임의로 사용한 뒤 , 공사대금 등을 부풀려 회계처리한 차액 등으로 위 사용분을 충당하여 놓는 방법 또는 미리 공사대금 등을 부풀려 회계처 리한 뒤 그 차액을 경리직원을 통해 따로 보관해 놓은 다음 이를 필요할 때마다 임의 로 사용하는 방법으로 위 휴게소 등 운영비를 횡령하기로 마음먹었다 .

2. The defendant's crypty

피고인은 2006 . 9 . 11 . 경 대전 대덕구 동 - 에 있는 피해자 대한민국재향군 인회의 고속도로휴게소 사업본부 ♡□□휴게소에서 경리직원 장△▲을 통해 업무상 보 관하고 있던 휴게소 운영비 350만 원을 전무인 피고인 " 최을병 " 을 통해 갖고 온 다음 , 그 무렵 위 재향군인회 회장 박♧☆에게 개인활동비로 지급한 것을 비롯하여 그 때부 터 2009 . 4 . 29 . 경까지 범죄일람표 1 기재와 같이 ♡□□휴게소 , BBQ♤휴게소 등지 에서 같은 방법으로 총 53회에 걸쳐 105 , 027 , 000원을 마음대로 소비하였다 .

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

3. Defendant’s “Pest”

피고인은 2009 . 5 . 29 . 경 위 ♡□□휴게소에서 경리직원 김♧◎을 통해 업무상 보관하 고 있던 휴게소 운영비 50만 원을 위 김♧으로부터 교부받은 다음 , 그 무렵 전 본부 장인 피고인 " 정갑을 " 에게 여비로 지급한 것을 비롯하여 2005 . 8 . 2 . 경부터 2009 . 7 . 7 . 경까지 범죄일람표 2 기재와 같이 ♡□□휴게소 , ♧♧♤♤휴게소 등지에서 같은 방법 으로 총 46회에 걸쳐 60 , 600 , 000원을 마음대로 소비하였다 .

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

4. Defendant’s "Sick Service"

피고인은 2004 . 10 . 28 . 경 위 ♡□□ 휴게소에서 경리직원 장△▲을 통해 업무상 보관 하고 있던 휴게소 운영비 10만 원을 위 장△▲으로부터 교부받은 다음 , 그 무렵 친목 단체인 고속도로휴게소장 모임 회비로 사용한 것을 비롯하여 그 때부터 2008 . 7 . 1 . 경 까지 범죄일람표 3 기재와 같이 ♡□□휴게소 등지에서 같은 방법으로 총 194회에 걸 쳐 56 , 806 , 960원을 마음대로 소비하였다 .

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

5. The defendant's term "accination"

피고인은 2008 . 8 . 20 . 경 충남 & & 군 면 리 에 있는 ♧♧♤♤휴게소에서 경리직원 장△▲을 통해 업무상 보관하고 있던 휴게소 운영비 30만 원을 위 장△▲으 로부터 교부받은 다음 , 그 무렵 친목단체인 고속도로휴게소장 모임 회식비로 사용한 것을 비롯하여 2008 . 7 . 14 . 경부터 2009 . 7 . 6 . 경까지 범죄일람표 4 기재와 같이 BB ♤♤ 휴게소 등지에서 같은 방법으로 총 38회에 걸쳐 12 , 760 , 000원을 마음대로 소비하 였다 .

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of the witness, mistake, and mistake;

1 . 정 , 유 , 장△▲ , 김 , 오 , 유 , 임 , 오 , 조 , 한 , 김

- this, new, yellow, yellow, white, Han, Park, leap, Kim, Kim

applicable to the respective police testimony laws and regulations in relation to the police against, and against, Hu, Kim, Kim, Kim, Kim, Kim, Kim, Kim, and Kim.

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts;

Defendants: Articles 356 and 355(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Selection of penalty;

Defendant 1’s “Sicks”, “Sicks”, “Sicks”, “Sicks”, and “Sicks”, respectively.

Defendant 1’s term “the selection of fines”

1. Detention in a workhouse (the "defendant" in this Article);

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of the execution of Defendant 1 (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant 1”)

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. A provisional payment order (defendants referred to as "the family payment order");

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Grounds for sentencing

○ possible term section

Defendant 2’s “A” is the type 2 of embezzlement (at least KRW 100 million, but less than KRW 500 million), and the term of the possible term of punishment between one year and three years.

Defendant “B”, “B”, “B”, “B” and “B” are type 1 (less than KRW 100 million) of embezzlement, and the possible section of the punishment shall be from April to April 1.

○ Mitigation elements

Defendant “B” submitted a written agreement with the Korean Veterans Association (hereinafter “The Korean Veterans Association”) which is the victim, “B” and “B” wishing to be the wife of the said Veterans Association in the case of A. B.

Defendant “The amount equivalent to the embezzlement amount was returned to the Veterans Association.”

Defendant 1, “The elderly in the eight order of age,” is an old person who is administered with a whole-scale rock, and thus is virtually unable to cope with aquatic life vitality.

Defendants did not have any other heavy criminal records prior to the instant case ( Defendant 1 did not have any other criminal records prior to the instant case (i.e., “A person who was sentenced to any heavier punishment,” and “A person who was sentenced to any other criminal records prior to the instant judgment,” and “A person who was subject to any other criminal records prior to the instant judgment, is the first offense.”

Defendants are divided into crimes.

In the event that the Defendants are punished by imprisonment with prison labor or a heavier punishment, the Defendants lose their position (Provided, That Defendant 1’s “The Defendants did not maintain their status,” and there are no relevant factors to disadvantage the status of the Defendants).

It is also recognized that considerable portion of the funds raised by the Defendants is used as expenses for the management of the organization.

○ Aggravation

Among the methods of committing the Defendants, the part of the methods of receiving rebates by withdrawing the supply price and construction cost of the rest area suppliers and construction business operators, which can be assessed as breach of trust. Although the prosecutor was indicted by organizing it as an occupational embezzlement, the illegality contained in the form of the act is deemed to be reasonable.

Defendant 1, including that the portion of the non-funds created by the instant crime flows out of the water of the main main body of the Veterans Association (hereinafter “Defendant 1”) is that the instant crime was committed on a very systematic basis due to the location of the president of the Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea.

Therefore, the victims of this case can be said to be members of the Korean Veterans Association rather than the Korean Veterans Association, and the Korean Veterans Association's organization can be said to be the direct parties of this case that should express the intention of this case to the members of the Korean Veterans Association and reduce the bones of this case.

In addition, this case is not a case of being discovered by the Veterans Association itself, but a case of being known as the substance by a third party's information, and it can be said that the Veterans Association, which can be directly a party to the case, wants to have his wife as a party to the case, is a key part of doubting whether the case is self-managed. Therefore, even if the agreement was submitted under the name of the president of the Veterans Association, the evaluation thereof is very limited.

○ Final Grounds for Sentencing

The Defendants are bound to undergo difficulties in managing the organization because of the excessive amount of expenses allocated as a manager of the organization. Therefore, the Defendants are asserting that considering that there is an inevitable aspect to cover the expenses, they are entitled to imprisonment so that their status can be maintained by avoiding the amount of imprisonment.

However, this case should be approached on the level of systematic corruption rather than just property crime. If there is no adequate punishment for a crime discovered as much as the detection is difficult, this society cannot be expected to be transparent in the future. Accordingly, strict sentencing is inevitable.

As a result of a comprehensive examination of the various reasons for sentencing as seen above, it is thought that the embezzlement amount may be relieved of any disadvantage in relation to the status by being punished by a fine, but the remaining Defendants, as a matter of course, should be sentenced to imprisonment, so that they would be at a disadvantage in relation to their status. However, as a result, the Defendants lose their position (the Defendants “A” mainly considered that the Defendants’ “I was de facto unable to be imprisoned by age and pre-sub-sub-sub-sub-subsub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Kim Dong-dong