[헤럴드경제=김보영 기자] When his wife, who was in a married relationship, died of cancer, his 70s, who deposited his account in his account, was sentenced to fines in the appeals.
According to the legal profession, the Chuncheon District Criminal Detective (Deputy Judge Shim Hyun -geun) announced on the 28th that A (76), who was accused of embezzlement, was sentenced to a fine of 5 million won as with the court.
Mr. A, who has been married to his wife since 1999, was briefly prosecuted on charges of embezzlement of about 30 million won in his bankbook when Mr. B died in November 2022.
As a result of the survey, Mr. A deposited about 41 million won in his bank account, and 10 million won was paid for Mr. B’s funeral expenses, and the remaining money was used for personal debt and living expenses without returning it to the legal deceitful children.
Mr. A, who received a fine order of 3 million won for this, claimed to be innocent for a formal trial.
However, the Chuncheon District Court Wonju Support, who was in charge of the first trial, raised the fine, saying, “The defendant has withdrawn a lot of money from the account of the deceased name that he is owned by the heirs more than two hours after the death of the victim.”
A, who was disobeyed by this ruling, insisted in the appeal court that “I was in charge of the money in Mr. B’s account because I left my income to Mr. B.” He said, “It was not a embezzlement because I spent the remaining money on the repayment of debt that was paid for Mr. B’s hospital.”
In the end of August 2021, the Appeals Tribunal had a balance of Mr. B’s account at the end of August 2021, and the insurance amount of 80 million won was deposited in 17 times from October to one year after the diagnosis of cancer. There is no data.
After the diagnosis of cancer, Mr. A was managing his account and keeping his money, and according to Mr. B’s death, he was guilty that Mr. A was in the status of protecting or managing the property of Mr. B’s children because his children inherited the deposit of money deposited in the account.
In addition, there was no evidence to admit that Mr. A had borrowed money from his acquaintances to pay the hospital expenses, and after the diagnosis of cancer, there was plenty of money to pay for the cost of treatment.
The Tribunal maintained the centrifugal sentence, saying, “I can’t find a special situation change so that I have to change the new top or brother to reflect in my sentence after the judgment.”
bbo@heraldcorp.com
