logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.07 2016고합905
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Acceptance of money and valuables for consideration for reappointment of the representative director of LA company;

A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) at the time of early March 2009, when the term of office of the representative director of L/C corporation (hereinafter “L”) was expected to expire, the L/C representative M was expected to be sold to N on January 2009, and there was a possibility of reappointment of his/her representative director on the part of N which would have decided the appointment of L/C representative director; and (b) the sale was no longer possible due to N’s financial reasons; (c) on January 2009, the P, who had served as a key role in deciding the appointment of L/C representative director again on January 2009, made efforts to find out a counter for soliciting the reappointment of the representative director; (d) however, P did not have any solicitation counter to the appointment of the private financial business from outside the private sector; (e) around that time, the P did not have any negative opinion on the reappointment of P in the office of corporate finance management of L/C; and (e) reported the negative opinion about M/C related persons in the media’s sales process.

Since M’s reappointment cannot be denied, it was reported to the effect that “it was against the will of the O bank,” it was known that there was a negative challenge against the reappointment of M’s representative director at the O bank which has the authority to appoint representative director by deciding a candidate for L’s representative director as the largest shareholder.

On the other hand, in the above circumstances, the defendant suggested to the officer R in charge of L's publicity to the effect that "it is possible to assist the president's reappointment because he knows P well," and asked M's president to deliver the horse, and R delivered the above proposal to M.

In such a situation, the Defendant is well aware of “P” individually.

The president may be reappointed upon request from P.

arrow