logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2021.02.17 2020고정335
업무상횡령
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From January 22, 2013 to December 31, 2016, the Defendant served as a village head.

On April 18, 2016, around 20:10, a meeting was held in the village center B in order to obtain the consent of village residents related to the construction of a fertilizer factory in the vicinity of B, and the “C” as stated in the indictment of C Co., Ltd. is a clerical error in the “C” and thus, is corrected as above.

In the year, the village development fund was agreed to pay five million won each year on condition that it should be paid for ten years.

On May 24, 2016, C transferred KRW 2,50,000 to the NAC account in the name of the defendant who was used as a village passbook.

The Defendant did not enter this in the register of the village revenue ledger, and embezzled it by voluntarily consuming it for personal use while being kept in the village passbook.

Summary of Evidence

1. A community revenue ledger of the defendant's statements made to F in the police preparation of legal statements E by witness E, some of the defendants;

1. Application of investigation reports (Attachment of documents related to civil procedures to the party of the B Village Association), investigation reports (Submission of details of account transactions in the account of the suspect village);

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment for a crime;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the assertion is to recognize the objective factual basis of the instant case, but the Defendant used money remaining in the passbook without knowing that money was deposited under the name of the Village Development Fund, and thus, to the effect that the Defendant did not have the intention of embezzlement.

2. Determination

A. However, in relation to the establishment of a compost factory around May 20, 2016, the representative E of C prepared and notarized a letter of intent to pay the development fund to B from this court, and around that time, received the account number from the Defendant and received KRW 2,500,000 as the advance payment for the development fund on May 24, 2016.

arrow