logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2013.04.11 2012고단4819
업무상횡령
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and for one year, respectively.

, however, the defendant from the date of this judgment.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A as a director of the victim F Co., Ltd. in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E 802, the overall management was managed, and Defendant B was in charge of the fund management as a management director of F.

From July 2009, the Defendants agreed to underwrite convertible bonds with the representative H of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) and F’s convertible bonds from around October of the same year, determined the subscription price of convertible bonds at KRW 2 billion, and transferred KRW 110 million to the solomon securities account in the name of Defendant B, which is the seat of Defendant A, KRW 300 million,00 million, and KRW 2 billion in total, which was received from G on October 15 of the same year and kept in custody for F, respectively, on October 21 of the same year.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to keep the victim's property in custody in the course of business, and embezzled it.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ partial statements in the first trial record;

1. Defendant A’s statement written by the Defendants among the interrogation protocol of the second prosecutor’s office against Defendant A

1. Report on investigation by each prosecutor (Attachment to details of operation expenses and hearing statements);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on acceptance of convertible bonds and judgment (Seoul Southern District Court 2010Kahap20830)

1. Relevant Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and Article 30 of the Criminal Act.

1. It is so decided as per Disposition under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., the fact that there is no particular criminal record for the accused, that the Defendants paid more than the amount of embezzlement to the victim, that the Defendants agreed smoothly with the victim, and that the mistakes are divided into several parts).

arrow