logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2011.01.14 2010노2844
배임수재
Text

The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

C shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

Defendant .

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment (one year of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) set by the court below against Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are aware of the fact that Defendant D and Q were to contribute KRW 400 million to M University as a school development fund, and did not know that the new construction of this case was given in return for receiving orders. Defendant D introduced Defendant D to Defendant C and Defendant D was accompanied in the process of delivering KRW 400 million to Defendant C. Thus, Defendant B cannot be deemed to have conspired to commit the crime of taking property in breach of trust by Defendant A and C.

(2) The sentence of imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) determined by the court below on Defendant B is too unreasonable.

C. The punishment determined by the lower court against Defendant C (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

D. (1) misunderstanding of facts (A) Defendant D additionally received KRW 300 million, which Defendant D additionally received from Q, from Q, as the so-called “Liber” in return for the effort to induce Q to take the instant new construction work, and Q does not belong to Q that Defendant D additionally demanded KRW 300 million in return for the principle of construction completion.

(B) The Defendant D’s receipt of KRW 150 million from Defendant B and C is merely a service charge in relation to the purchase of the extension site of MUU, and it does not receive a return of the money paid in return for the new construction project of this case.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant D (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of social service, 80 hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

E. A prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles can be recognized that Defendant D received KRW 400 million from Q in return for the principle of completion of the new construction work in this case, in collaboration with Defendant A, B, and C, the lower court.

arrow