beta
Text
Defendants are not guilty.
Reasons
1. Defendant A’s representative director of G Co., Ltd., Defendant B’s general director in charge of accounting of Co., Ltd., and Defendant C’s general director in charge of editing of Co., Ltd.
Even if the Defendants received the payment for the purpose of capital increase from Kimpo-si and Kimpo-si, the Defendants conspired to receive the money in the name of the payment by soliciting the buyers under the pretext of offering capital increase, in the absence of the ability and intent to distribute the actual shares or to grant the rights as shareholders.
On May 24, 2006, at the G conference room of Kimpo-si H, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, the Defendants falsely stated that “The victims would issue shares and distribute shares if they participate in the capital increase with the capital increase of the company G.”
However, the Defendants thought that they would use the money received from the victims as the operational fund of G Co., Ltd., and even if they received money from the victims, they did not have the intent or ability to distribute shares to the victims.
As above, the Defendants, as well as by deceiving the victim and acquiring KRW 500,000 from the victim to the corporate account (J) of G Co., Ltd., the Defendants acquired KRW 500,000 from May 24, 2006 to January 15, 2007, and acquired KRW 14,00,000 from the victims on five occasions, such as the statement in the attached crime list.
2. The Plaintiff submitted only the G’s articles of incorporation as amended on August 26, 2008 without submitting the company G (hereinafter “G”)’s articles of incorporation at the time of the instant case. Of that, Article 11 subparag. 2 only provides that “If there exists a special resolution for the shareholders’ meeting, the company may allocate new shares to those who are not shareholders.” As such, the G’s articles of incorporation at the time of the instant case can not be inferred as having no particular provision other than the above provision in relation to the capital increase with respect to the capital increase, and the G should have continued to receive capital increase in accordance with the provisions of the Commercial Act.