이순자 전 경주대 총장이 업무상횡령 및 사립학교법 위반 혐의로 징역 2년에 집행유예 3년, 사회봉사 120시간을 선고를 확정 받았다.

대법원 1부는 교비를 빼돌리거나 교비회계 수입을 다른 회계로 돌린 혐의(업무상횡령·사립학교법 위반)로 기소된 이 전 총장에 대해 징역 2년에 집행유예 3년, 사회봉사 120시간을 선고한 원심을 확정했다고 15일 밝혔다.

▲ 이순자 경주대 전 총장

앞서 이 전 총장은 2015년 6월부터 2017년 7월까지 딸이 대표이사로 있는 호텔 임차보증금이나 월세, 리모델링 비용 등 5억 5천여만 원을 경주대 교비회계에서 지출하는 등 교비회계 운영과 학사관리 관련 법을 어긴 혐의로 기소되었다.

이에 1심 재판부는 이순자 전 총장의 혐의를 대부분 유죄로 인정하며 “전과가 없고, 횡령한 교비를 개인적으로 사용하지 않은 점, 배우자인 김일윤 경주대 이사장이 10억 원을 학교재단에 환원한 점 등을 참고”하여 징역 2년에 집행유예 3년, 사회봉사 120시간을 선고했다.

그러나 이 전 총장은 횡령의 고의 또는 불법영득의 의사가 없다며 사실오인 및 법리 오해와 원심의 형이 너무 무거워 부당하다며 항소했다.

하지만 항소심 재판부는“피고인의 고의가 넉넉히 인정돼 원심이 선고한 형이 너무 무거워 재량의 합리적 범위를 벗어날 정도로 부당하다고 볼 수 없다”며 항소를 기각했고 이어진 상고에서 대법원 역시 원심의 판단이 정당하다며 피고인의 상고를 기각하였다.

<아래는 구글번역기로 번역한 기사 전문이다.>

Former Gyeongju National University president Lee Soon-ja was sentenced to two years in prison, three years probation, and 120 hours of social service for business embezzlement and violation of the Private School Act.

The first part of the Supreme Court condemned the former president, who was accused of deducting school expenses or distributing school expenses accounting income to other accounts (business embezzlement, violation of the Private School Act), and sentenced to two years in prison, three years probation, and 120 hours of social service. It was announced on the 15th that it was confirmed.

Previously, former President Lee spent 550 million won in Gyeongju National University school expenses account, such as a hotel rental deposit, monthly rent, and remodeling expenses, from June 2015 to July 2017. He was charged with violating the relevant laws.

Accordingly, the first trial court admitted that most of the charges of former President Lee Soon-ja were guilty and said, “There was no criminal record, and the fact that he did not personally use the embezzled school expenses, and that his spouse, Kim Il-yoon, the chairman of Gyeongju University, returned 1 billion won to the school foundation. For reference,” he was sentenced to two years in prison, three years probation, and 120 hours of social service.

However, former President Lee appealed that he had no intention of embezzlement or illegal acquisition, and that the facts and misunderstandings of the law and the court sentence were too heavy to be unfair.

However, the court of appeals court dismissed the appeal, saying, “The sentence sentenced by the defendant was sufficiently acknowledged, and the sentence sentenced by the lower court was too heavy to be considered unfair enough to exceed the reasonable scope of discretion.” In the subsequent appeal, the Supreme Court also said that the judgment of the lower court was justified. His appeal was dismissed.