대표이사의 법인 자금 횡령액이라도 특별한 사정이 있는 경우 사외유출로 볼 수 없음[국패]
Seoul Administrative Court 2008Guhap40677 ( October 23, 2009)
Seocho 208west 2142 ( October 14, 2008)
Even the embezzlement of corporate funds of the representative director shall not be deemed an outflow from the company in special circumstances.
In light of the fact that a corporation has filed an application for compensation order equivalent to the amount of embezzlement after filing a criminal charge against the representative director, and that it has dismissed from the office of the representative director, it is reasonable to deem that the corporation has not implicitly or ratified the act of embezzlement of the representative director, and that it has a damage claim from embezzlement. Therefore, the amount equivalent to the embezzlement cannot be deemed that the
The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
1. Purport of claim
Each disposition of the Defendant imposed on the Plaintiff on March 3, 2008, the amount of KRW 965,43,480 for earned income for the year 2003, KRW 569,856,00 for earned income for the year 2004, and KRW 4,920,160 for earned income for the year 205.
2. Purport of appeal
The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The court's reasoning concerning this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance among the judgment of the first instance. Thus, the court's reasoning is acceptable in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just and therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.