logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.07.18 2014고단1013
업무상횡령등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 29, 2012, the Defendant was indicted to the Cheongju District Court for a violation of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (Leakage of business secrets, etc.), and was pending in the first instance trial, and is in the process of litigation and on behalf of the victim D’s financial director of Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, on behalf of the said company, and actually manages the said company, and exercise overall control over the said company’s business operations.

The defendant finally instructed and enforced the funds management and expenditure of the above company shall use the funds only for the purposes of the interest of the above company, and the defendant shall not use the funds of the above company in paying the attorney appointment fees for the criminal defendant and accomplices' personal offenses.

G, which is the head of the business team of the Defendant and E, the Defendant and E, was recruited to manufacture and sell the products by reducing the trade secrets of rubber stuffs and co-rating methods for semiconductors produced by E, and F and G disclosed the trade secrets of E by transferring the combination technology of the above detailed and co-rating agents and the information on mass production, thereby acquiring the Defendant’s trade secrets. The Defendant used them to produce and sell semiconductor gold stuffs and co-rating systems equivalent to KRW 1.7 billion in sales, and acquired and used the trade secrets of E by acquiring and selling the trade secrets of E.

Accordingly, on December 6, 2012, the Defendant violated the above occupational duties and voluntarily withdrawn KRW 25,000,000 from the Daegu Bank Account (H) under the name of the victim D Co., Ltd., and paid to the attorney-at-law in Seoul via I at the cost of appointing attorney-at-law in the above criminal case against the Defendant and F and G.

As a result, the defendant embezzled the amount of KRW 25,00,000 owned by D Co., Ltd. in business custody, and at the same time he has F and G acquire pecuniary benefits equivalent to the amount paid.

arrow