beta
Text
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The punishment of the lower court (a fine of 6 million won) is too unreasonable.
B. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts, it is recognized that the defendant arbitrarily consumed and embezzled the total amount of KRW 58,986,240 while keeping the sales proceeds of goods for the victim Co., Ltd., and in particular, since there is no evidence that the defendant used the above amount for the victim's personal purpose, the above amount is deemed to have been used for the defendant's personal purpose, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the above amount, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, by misunderstanding the fact that the court below acquitted the defendant.
2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts
A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant, from the early September 2015, was the representative director of the 4th victims of the building in the Namyang-si, Gyeonggi-si, who was engaged in the business of the said company's miscellaneous distribution, sale, and collection of money.
From September 30, 2015 to May 8, 2018, the Defendant spent KRW 58,986,240 in total on 23 occasions at an unspecified place in Gyeonggi-do, as indicated in the [Attachment Table 1 to 18,34, and 38] from around September 30, 2015, the Defendant collected KRW 2,508,594,570 for the sale of miscellaneous currency at the office of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. and kept for the victim company. From March 18, 2016, the Defendant spent KRW 7,00,000 in personal use for the victim company.
As a result, the defendant embezzled the property of the victim who was in custody on duty.
B. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial of the relevant legal doctrine 1 ought to be borne by the prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt ought to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for the judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.