beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part against Defendant A and B and the part against Defendant C and F shall be reversed respectively.
Defendant .
Reasons
1. Of the facts charged in the instant case against the Defendants, the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation) by the waiver of the right to redemption of the redemption priority conversion principle against Defendant M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”), the violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (hereinafter “Capital Markets Act”) due to the violation of each of the obligation to report stocks owned by Defendant B, and the violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (hereinafter “Capital Markets Act”) was pronounced not guilty at the lower court. Accordingly, the above Defendants and the public prosecutor were exempted from the object of public defense among the parties because they did not appeal. Accordingly, the judgment of the lower court’s conviction and the conclusion of innocence is followed.
Therefore, the scope of this court's trial is limited to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and fraud, which are the primary and ancillary charges due to the issuance of the CP among the guilty portion against the defendants and the acquittal portion against the defendants
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendants 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles regarding M’s acquisition of 6 million won per share for conversion of N redemption conversion and 24 billion won for N (the Defendants A, F-related parts, and the Defendant’s “Defendants” in this paragraph refers to the above Defendants together). For the following reasons, the Defendants obtained Ma the 6 million share per share for conversion of N redemption conversion, and granted NA a loan of 24 billion won to N did not constitute an act of breach of trust or an act of breach of trust. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending of legal principles or misapprehending of legal principles.
(1) The 24 billion won loan to M is an investment in the new project, in addition to the support to U.S. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “U”), from which M’s N repayment priority is 6 million won per share and N’s 6 million won per share.