업무상횡령등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
The Defendant is the head of the development and purchase division and the head of the logistics team team of “B” that is a victimized company from around 2012 to April 30, 2018, who takes charge of inventory management and production orders against an external subcontractor.
The defendant, while in office in the damaged company, deducted nice containers, which are subsidiary materials, and used friendly parts with the subcontractor of the victimized company, made the subcontractor manufacture finished products, and the defendant disposed of them to gain profits.
1. On March 26, 2018, the Defendant does not dispute only the volume of “F” during the crime of violating the Trademark Act by: (a) around March 26, 2018, at the logistics warehouse of the damaged company located in the Nam-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City C and the third floor; and (b) around December 200, the Defendant did not dispute only the volume of “F” among the crimes of violating the Trademark Act.
During the business custody of the injured company (unit price of KRW 725, total amount of KRW 1595,00 per unit price) on behalf of the injured company, it provided it to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), which is an external partner, and had such D produce products of KRW 80,000,000 at the market price and sold them.
Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled the property amounting to KRW 1,595,00 of the victimized company.
2. No person who violates the Trademark Act shall use a trademark identical with the registered trademark of another person for goods similar to the designated goods, or use a trademark similar to the registered trademark of another person for goods identical with or similar
Nevertheless, on March 26, 2018, the Defendant, without permission of the above “B” as a trademark right holder, produced 1,500 products, including 1,200 products of “E” (250,000 won in total, 30,000 won in the market price per opening) and 300 products of “F” (50,000 won in total, 15,000 won in the market price per opening price), and arbitrarily disposed of them in an irregular manner, thereby infringing the trademark right of the trademark right holder.
Summary of Evidence
1. The defendant;