logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.06.27 2018고정5
업무상과실장물취득
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by fine of 3,00,000 won, by imprisonment of 6 months and fine of 3,000,000 won.

The defendants are the defendants.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

"2018 Highly 5"

1. Defendant A is a person who is engaged in sales of scrap metal with the trade name “G” from Jin-si, Jin-si.

On September 2015, the Defendant purchased two cable boxes equivalent to KRW 13,108,649 at the market price that he embezzled in said G, H, I, J, and K within the victim Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd.

In such cases, there was a duty of care to verify whether the seller is stolen by properly examining the details of the personal information of the seller and the process of acquiring electric wires, the state of the acquisition, the motive for the sale, and the price of the transaction price.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected the above duty of care and neglected the judgment on the stolen water, thereby purchasing the stolen goods from the above H, etc. in cash amounting to approximately KRW 3,500 per kilogram, and acquiring the stolen goods from the above H, etc. from April 2016, the Defendant purchased approximately KRW 83.8t (14 boxes) and acquired the stolen goods by negligence in the course of business by purchasing approximately KRW 83,330,00,00 from the time to April 15, 2016, as shown in attached Table 8 through 15 of the List of Offenses Act.

2. Defendant B is a person engaged in sales of scrap metal with the trade name “G” from Jin-si, Jin-si.

On December 2, 2013, the Defendant purchased two cable boxes equivalent to KRW 12,949,729 at the market price that he embezzled from the above G, H, I, L, and J in the victim Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd.

In such cases, there was a duty of care to verify whether the seller is stolen by properly examining the details of the personal information of the seller and the process of acquiring electric wires, the state of the acquisition, the motive for the sale, and the price of the transaction price.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected the above duty of care and neglected the judgment on the stolen water, thereby neglecting the above duty of care and neglecting the judgment on the stolen water to KRW 3,500 per 1kg.

arrow