beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff, Defendant C, and Defendant C, jointly with Defendant C, KRW 1,237,00,00,000, respectively.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On May 6, 1986, the Plaintiff was a cooperative established in Jeonju-gun, Jeonbuk-gun, and Defendant C served as the president from March 1, 2012 to February 1, 2016.
Defendant B, while serving as the Plaintiff’s managing director from October 1, 2007 to June 30, 2016, managed the purchase and sale of agrochemicals, and managed the purchase and sale of sales proceeds, and took overall charge of personnel and service management, and business affairs.
B. Around September 12, 2012, Defendant C ordered Defendant C to transfer KRW 80,000,000 from the national bank account in his/her name to the national bank account in his/her name and used it for debt repayment and overseas investment, etc., and ordered Defendant C to arbitrarily use the sum of KRW 1,337,002,00 over 21 times in total from around that time until May 27, 2015, as indicated in attached Tables 1 through 10, 12, and 22.
C. Defendant B was charged with aiding and abetting the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) by Defendant C, even though he was aware that he embezzled the sales proceeds of agrochemicals as above, by ordering the Plaintiff’s accounting staff E, etc. to remit the money ordered by Defendant C to the accounting staff E, etc.
Defendant B was found guilty of the facts charged in attached Tables 1 through 10, 12 through 21 on September 21, 2017, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years of imprisonment, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years of imprisonment. Defendant B was sentenced not guilty on the ground that the amount of the facts charged in attached Table 11 constitutes money for which the Plaintiff had a duty to return to Defendant C.
(Specialju District Court Decision 2017Gohap15). The above judgment is pending in the appellate court as the Gwangju High Court (Seoul High Court) 2017No194, upon appeal by both the prosecutor and the defendant.
【Ground for recognition” includes the fact that there is no dispute, Gap No. 15.