업무상배임
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant has been engaged in the business of selling the households produced by the victim C in the victim C Co., Ltd. located in the victim Co., Ltd. from April 201 to April 201 and collecting the proceeds thereof.
On April 30, 201, the Defendant violated the above duties and set off the Defendant’s claim amounting to KRW 920,000 against the E agency of the Victim Company’s E at will from April 30, 201 to May 30, 2011, including the Defendant’s claim amounting to KRW 162,834,00,00 in total from April 30, 201 to May 30, 201, as indicated in the list of crimes, against the Defendant’s personal obligation.
Accordingly, the defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 62,834,00, and suffered property damage equivalent to the same amount in the victim company.
2. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged and sentenced the Defendant to six months’s imprisonment.
3. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., the form of punishment by the lower court) is excessively unreasonable.
4. Ex officio determination
(a) ex officio look at the property damage in breach of trust, including not only cases where a real damage was inflicted but also cases where a risk of actual damage to property has been caused.
The determination on the existence of property damage shall be based on the legal judgment in relation to the property status of the principal, but shall be understood from an economic point of view, and even if the effect of the breach of trust is not recognized by the legal judgment, if the principal actually damages or causes the risk of actual damage to the property, it shall be deemed that the property damage is incurred, but if the risk of such damage is not caused, the breach of trust shall not be established.
Supreme Court on March 25, 2010