특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)
The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence against the Defendants is publicly announced.
1. Defendant A is a bond company, and Defendant B is a former director of (State) H.
Defendant
A around February 22, 2008, around 2008 (State) H (the name of the company at the time is (State I), while lending KRW 1.5 billion to (State I), A was granted the maximum claim amount of KRW 2 billion to six units, including ( State) Nos. 1105 through 1110 of the Geumcheon-gu Seoul High Court J building, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul.
After that, Defendant A was the actual owner of (State) H around August 2010.
After agreement was reached on the transfer of the instant right to collateral security to the victim (State) L introduced by K and Defendant B (hereinafter “victim”) and around August 14, 2010, it sent O, one of its employees, at the N Office in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Law Firm M, around August 14, 2010.
In other words, the Defendant transferred the instant right to collateral security to the Victim Company by delivering the amount of KRW 1,00,000,000 from the employees of the Victim Company by cash and check, and by delivering his seal imprint certificates, proxy certificates, and registration certificates, etc. of the instant right to collateral security.
Therefore, the duty of Defendant A to perform the registration procedure for the transfer of the instant collateral security right to the victim company was incurred.
Nevertheless, Defendant A conspired with Defendant B to transfer the instant right to collateral security to another person on the ground that the victim company did not register the transfer of the instant right to collateral security until December 201, and the right to collateral security remains in its name. On December 15, 2011, Defendant A received KRW 500 million from P introduced by Defendant B and completed the registration of the transfer of the instant right to collateral security, thereby obtaining property benefits equivalent to KRW 1 billion in the transfer price of the instant right to collateral security received from the victim company and causing property damage equivalent to the same amount to the victim company.
2. Summary of the Defendants and their defense counsel’s assertion
A. Defendant A did not have conspired with Defendant B, and the victim company of this case.