beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.
Defendant
B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Defendant
A.
Reasons
The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) Defendant A’s misunderstanding of the facts as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (affort) and misapprehension of the legal principles on September 4, 2011; (b) stated the minutes of the general meeting of the E clan (hereinafter “instant clan”); (c) stated that “All rights related to loans have been resolved and reported after execution by the president and the board of directors; and (d) at the general meeting above, Defendant A lent money borrowed by the instant clan from the bank to I to the law firm at the time of the above general meeting; and (e) there was a resolution of the board of directors on September 6, 2011 that lent KRW 90 million to I. Thus, the above KRW 90 million was lent through lawful procedures; (c) Defendant A’s breach of trust cannot be established; and (d) Defendant A’s success in the instant clan’s debt repayment of KRW 900 million to I in favor of the said law firm during the instant clan.
In light of the fact that B, who was in charge of the lawsuit seeking the above clan, was disqualified as an attorney, or was unaware of his/her debt status, the defendant did not think that 90 million won was incurred to the clan of this case on the ground that B, who was in charge of the lawsuit seeking the above clan, was not aware of his/her debt status, and thus, he/she did not think that she would incur damage to the
The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or legal principles.
The misunderstanding of the facts as to the taking of property in breach of trust, and the misunderstanding of the legal principles, which the Defendant received 300 million won from B, are not paid as compensation for the lending of the said 900 million won.
The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or legal principles.
The court below decided against the defendant in unfair sentencing.