logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.08.09 2016고단2645
업무상배임
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, while working as a regular business of the victim E in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from February 201 to November 2013, the Defendant: (a) the interest of the person who comprehensively controlled the part of oil sales business, such as oil purchase and sale; and (b) the person who obtained the victim’s consent from December 24, 201 to December 2, 2013 from December 24, 2012 to December 2, 2013 from the victim’s transaction partners and operated the F.

The above victim sold oil to the gas station, which is the business partner, and must pay oil by receiving oil from this land, and set the credit limit of the gas station, which is the business partner, from the daily sales of the gas station to four times the amount of sales of the gas station. As such, F Co., Ltd. was approximately KRW 400-600,000, and only to the extent, it can be supplied with oil on credit.

However, the Defendant had already taken over the F Company F’s debt of KRW 135 million and had already exceeded the above credit limit and could not receive oil supply due to credit.

Defendant breached his duty to supply oil to F Co., Ltd. without exceeding the above credit limit, and the Defendant supplied oil equivalent to KRW 103,544,00 in excess of the above credit limit to promote the interest of F, a customer of the victim from December 24, 2012 to December 2, 2013.

As a result, the Defendant acquired financial benefits equivalent to KRW 103,54,00 of the oil price supplied to F Co., Ltd. in excess of the credit limit, and caused damage to F Co., Ltd. by having the damaged person settle the amount of oil equivalent to the amount of the oil price in this case.

2. The gist of the defendant's and defense counsel's assertion is that rehabilitation is possible when they are operated without a competitor at the time when they want to operate the FF, and the defendant was appointed as the representative director for the benefit of the victim, but the same loss as stated in the facts charged has occurred due to multiple external factors.

arrow