logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2012.11.21 2012고합574
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)
Text

Defendants are not guilty.

Reasons

1. On March 25, 2011, Defendant B was sentenced to six months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes in the Seoul Southern District Court on March 25, 2011, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on April 2, 201.

Defendant

A serves as a nominal representative director of the Victim G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”) from June 1, 2006 to March 5, 2010, and was in charge of external duties of the company. Defendant B is the representative director of the Gyeonggi H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) from around 2005.

On January 2, 2005, the actual operator of the victim company I was awarded a contract for the reconstruction of the "J hotel in Pyeongtaek-gun of Gyeonggi-gun" implemented by H from Defendant B, and completed around September 8, 2005, H completed the registration of initial ownership of the above hotel on the 15th of the same month.

A Han Bank Co., Ltd., a creditor of H, filed an application for auction against the above hotel with the District Court around December 29, 2008, as H did not repay the loans. On January 21, 2009, the victim company did not receive KRW 2.65 million from Defendant B in the above auction court, and did not set a lien on the claim for construction payment and reported the right as a lien holder. As such, Defendant A had a duty to maintain the lien for the victim company until he received the above claim for construction payment from Defendant B until he received the above claim for construction payment.

Defendant

B, on February 2, 2010, Defendant A, who has a separate claim for construction cost equivalent to KRW 160,000,000,000, to Defendant A, separately, proposed to pay KRW 500,000 for the consideration of the waiver of the right of retention under the name of the victim company. Defendant A, in violation of the above duties against the victim company, accepted Defendant B’s proposal with a desire to receive the claim for personal construction cost first, and made February 2010.

arrow