logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.03.08 2014가단58033
손해배상(기)
Text

1. Defendant C’s KRW 32,467,60, and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from June 5, 2014 to March 8, 2017.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff Company completed the registration of incorporation on February 8, 2013 for the purpose of manufacturing money washing machines and appliances.

Defendant C was engaged in the Plaintiff Company’s financial and accounting management from February 1, 2013 to May 8, 2014.

The plaintiff filed a complaint against the defendant C through occupational embezzlement and occupational breach of trust, and the defendant C was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence on May 13, 2016 by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months, and the judgment of facts constituting the crime and the acquittal portion of the judgment are as follows.

1. Occupational embezzlement;

A. On February 25, 2013, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 5,000,000 from the account while working for the victim’s corporate bank account at the above victim’s office and used it as living expenses, etc.

From around that time to April 9, 2014, the Defendant consumed the total amount of KRW 9,479,000 of the funds of the Victim Company, which was kept on behalf of the Victim Company by the same method, in total 10 times (excluding No. 9) as shown in attached Table 1, as in attached Table 1, in mind.

As a result, the defendant embezzled the property of the victim who was in custody on duty.

B. On February 2, 2013, while the Defendant kept the funds of the victim company, the Defendant embezzled the amount of KRW 74,000,000 paid by credit card in the name of the Defendant’s wife B as the expense of the victim company by treating the funds of the victim company at the expense of the victim company and embezzled the amount of personal use as stated in the attached Table 3 as the expense of the victim company, and embezzled the total of KRW 10,584,080 over 487.

As a result, the defendant embezzled the property of the victim who was in custody on duty.

2. Since the Defendant, in occupational breach of trust, has been engaged in the business of managing funds and accounts of the said victim company, the duty to use funds for the business of the victim company.

arrow