The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B. Defendant A’s appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and misapprehension of legal principles) is that both the parties to the instant civil petition case and the principal lawsuit case (the combination of all these cases referred to as “the instant civil lawsuit”) are incorporated E (hereinafter “E”), and even if the Defendants had the E pay the attorney’s fees in the instant civil lawsuit, they do not constitute embezzlement of E’s money.

In addition, Defendant A seeking advice from an attorney-at-law who is a legal expert before paying the attorney's fees and hearing answers that there is no problem in paying the attorney's fees from the attorney-at-law's funds. Thus, the above Defendant's act constitutes an act without criminal intent.

In addition, as Defendant B’s employee paid litigation costs according to the direction of Defendant A, the representative, Defendant B did not have the possibility to avoid such act.

2. Determination

A. In a case where a decision is rendered to suspend the execution of director's duties against a director of a related legal entity, it is apparent that the performance of duties by the director who performs the duties of the pertinent legal entity would substantially interfere with the corporation's performance of duties. As such, a legal entity needs to file a dispute against the above provisional disposition unless the absence of director's qualification is objectively clear and there is no room for dispute. Thus, even if the representative of the legal entity pays the litigation expenses of the director who is the respondent of the pertinent provisional disposition case at the corporate expense within the necessary scope, it constitutes the payment of expenses necessary for the corporation's performance of duties and embezzlement

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 89Do1102, Jun. 26, 1990). Meanwhile, an attorney fee, which can be disbursed as the costs of an organization, is limited to a case where an organization itself becomes a party to a lawsuit, and thus, an organization.