beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s KRW 158,705,90 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from July 1, 2011 to December 1, 2014.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff contributed to the sound D development by improving the ability of D players to racing and realizing the process D, and is a nonprofit corporation established for the purpose of promoting friendship and welfare among its members. Defendant B is the Plaintiff’s chairperson from October 23, 2006 to June 27, 201, and Defendant C is a person who served as the head of the Plaintiff’s secretariat from February 8, 2009 to June 27, 201.
B. Defendant B received KRW 150,805,90 in total as remuneration for 57 occasions between June 25, 2007 and May 25, 2011, with knowledge that an executive is not entitled to remuneration in accordance with the Plaintiff’s articles of incorporation, and embezzled by using it for personal purposes, and ② Defendant C’s early June 201 as follows.
The plaintiff's funds 36,383,340 won returned after embezzlement, as described in the paragraph, were embezzled for personal purposes.
C. Defendant C embezzled KRW 15,00,000 for personal purposes between July 24, 2009 and December 21, 2009, while the Plaintiff’s retirement reserve was kept for business purposes, and embezzled KRW 21,383,340 for personal purposes, which was withdrawn and kept in cash for the payment of F’s retirement pay as D player’s retirement pay.
The Defendants are the Defendants:
C. The Defendant B was indicted on the charge of occupational embezzlement, such as the entry in the port of entry, and the Defendant C was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5,000,000, and a fine of KRW 3,000,000 (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012Da6562), and both the Defendants’ appeal and appeal were dismissed, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.
(The grounds for recognition) The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-4, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole, by the Seoul Central District Court 2013No3550, Supreme Court 2014Do2620).
2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. According to the above facts, Defendant B’s return of unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff (i.e., KRW 150,805,900,000), barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance.