logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.11.30 2017고합491
배임수재
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, while operating an advertising company under the trade name of “D” in Incheon City, was in charge of the affairs of examining the installation deliberation of advertisements, etc. conducted by Incheon Metropolitan City E as a deliberation member of the Incheon Metropolitan City Committee for Advertisement Management and Design Deliberation (hereinafter “instant Committee”).

The Defendant, via F around January and June 2014, indicated the following as the “Advertisements Management and Design Deliberation Committee” in the letter of indictment on January 27, 2014, and “F around June 24, 2014.” However, according to evidence, the above deliberation was conducted in writing and the Defendant presented the opinion around June 18, 201, and only the fact that the above deliberation was passed before June 23, 2014, and the fact that the above deliberation was passed before June 23, 2014, can be acknowledged (Evidence 485, 514, 537, etc.). Thus, the Defendant’s right of defense is modified ex officio within the scope not to exercise his/her right of defense (Evidence 485, 514, 537, etc.).

In the process of "pre-deliberation of permission for the change of J-Ro Horizontal Signboards", the consent of the committee and the deliberation were presented.

On June 27, 2014, immediately after the final approval of the project through the above deliberation process, the Defendant entered into a contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with I on June 27, 2014 (including value added tax) for the installation cost of 18,480,000 won (hereinafter “instant contract”). Accordingly, the Defendant, as a person in charge of another’s duties, ordered the said construction work to be subcontracted to KRW 14,080,00 (including value added tax). Accordingly, the Defendant acquired property benefits by obtaining a license for the said construction work upon unjust solicitation from I in relation to his duties.

(i) the evidence;

arrow