[배임·예비적으로횡령][공1975.7.15.(516),8484]
If a creditor who has received the registration of transfer of ownership as a bond security, disposes of real estate to another person and does not return the remaining amount appropriated for the principal and interest of the obligation to the debtor, the breach of trust is committed
If a creditor who has taken over an immovable property to secure the repayment of an obligation disposes of it to another person, the obligee has a duty to appropriate the principal, interest and expenses of the obligation, and return the remainder to the obligor. In such a case, the obligee is a person who administers another person's business, and if the remainder appropriating the principal, interest and expenses of the obligation
Defendant
Attorney Yellow-gu et al.
Seoul Criminal Court Decision 73No4381 delivered on September 12, 1974
The appeal is dismissed.
Judgment on the Defendant’s grounds of appeal:
The court of first instance that recognized the facts charged that the defendant's ownership transfer registration for the house of this case was aimed at securing the defendant's repayment of the obligation owed to the defendant is just and there is no error in the rules of evidence or the misunderstanding of facts. Thus, in the case where the above real estate was disposed of to another person, the defendant has a duty to appropriate the principal and interest of the claim and the expenses, and return the remainder to the debtor Kim Jong-ok. Therefore, the defendant is a person who administers another person's business (see Supreme Court Decision 71Do189, Mar. 9, 1971). Thus, the court below's judgment that recognized the crime of breach of trust against the defendant is just and there is no misapprehension of legal principles.
Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Lee Young-young (Presiding Justice)