beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.08.25 2016고단2330 (2)

명예훼손

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The victim Q Q Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Q Co., Ltd.”) is a company that constructed the “SCC club” located in the Rcheon-si (hereinafter “instant golf club”). The Defendants were members of the “SCC Shareholders Council” comprised of the persons who become the shareholders of T in accordance with the rehabilitation plan authorized in the rehabilitation procedure against T, after having sold the golf club membership from T or acquired the membership from third party.

In fact, the golf course of this case was created by T with the 160 billion won PF loan obtained by selling its membership rights and planned to repay the PF loan, but it was impossible to repay the PF loan due to the decline in the value of golf membership due to the international financial crisis at the end of 2008. The victim company, the contractor, as the contractor, was changed due to unexpected changes in the construction process, etc., and the cost of construction was increased. U.S. corporation, the subsidiary company of the victim company, was awarded a contract for the golf course of this case by public sale in trust and operated the golf course with the approval of the change in the business plan from the Gyeonggi-do branch to U.S. company, and the victim company did not intentionally delay construction in order to illegally deduct the golf course of this case.

Nevertheless, the Defendants: (a) calculated an excessive construction cost on purpose while executing the instant golf course; (b) delayed construction period; (c) planned bankruptcy by causing the operation of the instant golf course to a strike state; and (d) ordered U.S. U. as the subsidiary company of the victim company to win the instant golf course; and (b) avoided the instant golf course from the Defendants, the shareholders of T.

The victim company asserts that the defendant's golf course in this case is against the defendants.