업무상횡령등
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. Summary of the facts charged in this case
A. The Defendant is a person who served as a representative director from D to May 16, 2011, to April 25, 2012, when the Defendant was sexually embezzled.
While the Defendant was managing the National Bank E account in the name of the victim company for the victim company, on or after March 2012, he/she found the fact that the victim company director F and G were to dismiss the defendant from the office of representative director. After the victim company retired from the victim company and was established in the new factory, he/she concluded a lease agreement with the victim company for He/she was in progress at the victim company. On March 14, 2012, on the same day, he/she concluded a lease agreement with the lessee for the He/she was to deposit with the National Bank E Account in the name of the victim company. On March 21, 2012, the Defendant arbitrarily consumed the amount of KRW 9.1 million in total by remitting the amount of KRW 3.6 million from the above head of the Tong bank to the J as the brokerage fee.
Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.
B. The Defendant who attempted occupational breach of trust is subject to the above Section 1. A.
As described in Paragraph D, the victim corporation was working as representative director, and the victim corporation D was a corporation for the purpose of developing and selling small diving, and the defendant was responsible for the development of diving as representative director, so the defendant was responsible for the development of diving, so the defendant was responsible for the registration and preservation of the lost and intangible rights as to diving completed development under the name of the corporation D.
Nevertheless, around March 25, 2012, the Defendant filed an application for trademark registration with the trademark name "L" in the name of the Defendant, other than the victim corporation D, at the Internet patent (htp:/www. Patents.go.k) website at the Defendant’s residence located in Suwon-si and less than K at Suwon-si on March 25, 2012. However, the Defendant failed to reach the trademark examination and failed to achieve such intent.
2...