Whether a crime of breach of trust is established where a debtor has committed an act of unfairly reducing the value of security by disposing of the movable property owned by him/her after transferring it to a creditor by possession or alteration (affirmative)

Article 355(2) of the Criminal Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Domin, Attorneys Park Jae-young and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Park Young-chul

Jeonju District Court Decision 2010No154 decided August 13, 2010

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In a case where a debtor transfers movable property under his/her possession to a creditor by way of possession and alteration in order to secure a monetary obligation, it shall be deemed that the so-called weak security transfer is established. As such, the debtor is obligated to keep the movable property in custody so that the creditor can achieve the purpose of security and thereby becomes in the position of a person who administers his/her business against the creditor. Thus, in a case where the debtor unfairly reduced the security value by disposing of the movable property transferred for security, etc., the crime of breach of trust is established (see Supreme Court Decisions 82Do1829, Mar. 8, 1983; 89Do350, Jul. 25, 1989).

After compiling the adopted evidence, the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted the defendant of the violation of trust due to the disposal of the object transferred for security among the facts charged in this case, and sentenced the defendant guilty. In light of the above legal principles and records, such recognition and judgment of the court below is just, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cha Han-sung (Presiding Justice)