logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.19 2017고단8029
무고
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant constructed and sold B commercial buildings in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

As a actual operator of C, the head of the office shall manage and supervise the financing and the operation of the above company, and D operated the above company from around 201 to the end of 201 in a manner that takes exclusive charge of the operation of the company as the representative director of the above company.

On December 2, 2015, the Defendant operated C to the same occupation with the Defendant at a place where he was not a policeman.

D Around April 6, 2010: (a) deposited KRW 300 million in the company’s account (D) and deposited in the G account; (b) embezzled KRW 200 million in total by remitting KRW 100 million to the company’s account under the name of H; and (c) embezzled KRW 300 million in total by remitting KRW 150 million to its account on April 8, 2010; and (b) embezzled KRW 150 million in the G account from April 21, 2010 by remitting KRW 150,000 to D’s J account; and (d) embezzled KRW 200,000 in the company’s account from June 18, 2010 to KRW 300,000,000,000 in total; and (e) embezzled KRW 200,000 in the company’s account; and (e) embezzled KRW 300,000 in the company’s account.

G The L Bank head and the Do head in the name of G approved and disbursed the details of expenditure in possession and management by the Defendant. Among the details of cash expenditure stated in the above complaint, paragraph (1) sold in the above company.

B was used as a subsidy for the sale of a commercial building, and ② Paragraph (2) was used as a expense related to the establishment of the right to collateral security of the commercial building in the name of M (the husband of N) and M (the husband of the defendant) under the name of M, and ③ Paragraph (4) was used to remit to P.A., a trading company of the company, to the above company, and all was disbursed for the operation of the company, and the defendant was well aware of such circumstances.

Nevertheless, it is not appropriate.

arrow