beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2014.05.07 2013고합196

업무상배임등

Text

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Defendant

B 347,000,000 won shall be collected additionally.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A as the representative of A, from around 197 to around 2012, a victim KK corporation (hereinafter “victim company”) in Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu (hereinafter “victim company”) operated a cafeteria. Defendant B is a person who worked as a dietitian belonging to the victim’s general affairs and work support section from March 1992 to October 201, and the victim L (43 years of age) was enrolled in the victim company around 1993 and was elected to the chairman of the Trade Union around April 201, 201 and was elected to the chairman of the Trade Union around August 201, 201. The Defendants and the victim were friendly.

1. Defendant B managed and combined the number of meal personnel in the above cafeteria, reported to the company, and decided cafeteria New, and was in charge of inspecting food materials, and the victim company entered into a contract with I for the method of paying monthly meal expenses and fixed amount based on the number of meals reported by the Defendant.

On October 1, 2002, the Defendant received an illegal solicitation from A to the effect that “the number of food death workers is calculated to be excessive and reported to the company,” and in return, received KRW 3,500,000 from the transfer to the national bank account (Account Number N) in the name of the Defendant through M, a company accounting, and received from around that time to August 31, 2012, a total of KRW 347,00,000,000 from around 161 times, as indicated in the separate crime list, as indicated in the separate crime list.

As a result, the Defendant acquired 347,000,000 won in receipt of an illegal solicitation in relation to his duties.

2. As described in paragraph (1), Defendant A made an illegal solicitation with respect to his duties and granted KRW 347,00,000 to B.

3. Defendants’ co-principal conduct

A. Although Defendant B’s occupational breach of trust has a duty to accurately manage and collect food personnel and report them to the victim company, he/she may make a solicitation from Defendant A, such as the statement in paragraph (1), to “influence to report the number of food staff”.