beta
(영문) 대법원 2015.11.26 2015도11840

사기등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Defendants’ grounds of appeal

A. (1) As to the part on Defendant A’s occupational breach of trust, the crime of breach of trust is established by an act in violation of another’s duty by a person administering another’s business, thereby acquiring pecuniary advantage or having a third party acquire it, thereby causing loss

Here, “an act in violation of one’s duty” includes any act in violation of a fiduciary relationship with the principal by failing to perform an act that ought to be naturally, or by doing an act that is anticipated not to perform, under the provisions of law, the content of the contract, or the good faith principle, in light of specific circumstances, such as the content and nature of the business.

In addition, “property damage” includes not only the case of causing a real loss but also the case of causing a risk of property damage (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 83Do1568, Apr. 28, 1987; 91Do2963, May 26, 1992). Meanwhile, criminal facts should be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the selection of evidence and its probative value based on the premise of fact-finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court.

(Article 308(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act) The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, deems Defendant A as a joint representative director of KK and hereinafter referred to as “victim I Co., Ltd.” as the victim.

While the injured company was entrusted with its business, the circumstances in the judgment of the court below, such as the occurrence of property damage with respect to the second contract obligation of KRW 66 million, which was entered into with the Korea Credit Rating Co., Ltd., are recognized. In full view of these circumstances, Defendant A is called “H(hereinafter referred to as “H”) in violation of his duties.

this amount shall be exempted from the debt equivalent to that of the same amount, and the damaged company shall have its property equivalent to that of the same amount.