logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 홍성지원 2016.05.12 2015고합100
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등
Text

Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.

Reasons

1. Defendant A serving as the head of the E Agricultural Cooperatives (hereinafter “EF”) from February 10, 2010 to March 20, 2015; Defendant A is a person in charge of overall operations of the association, management of its members, and supervision of its employees; Defendant B works as the head of the association for EFF from June 1, 2010 to March 26, 2015; and Defendant A is a person in charge of overall operations of the association including economic activities with the approval from Defendant A, the head of the association; Defendant C is a person in charge of the purchase and sale of agricultural products and the management and supervision of the employees; and Defendant B works as a general manager of the EF from April 1, 2012 to March 20, 2012.

A. From June 11, 2012 to June 15, 2012, the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries rendered management diagnosis with respect to the NAF from around June 11, 2012 to around June 15, 2012, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry received a decision to suspend the recommendation of mergers on or around June 29, 2012 as it falls under three of the criteria for determination of merger recommendation (the union members aging, deposit deposits, and the amount of economic business). Upon receipt of the decision to suspend the recommendation of mergers, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry will eventually merge with other associations if the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry fails to resolve the three of the above criteria for determination of merger recommendation within three years.

Accordingly, while the Defendants sought measures to increase the volume of economic business in order to avoid the merger with other cooperatives after being subject to the decision of deferment of such recommendation, the Defendants concluded a contract to pay the remaining amount of money 0.1% of the commission to G and to increase the sales amount of EF by entering into the sales amount of the sales amount of EF in the manner of entering into the sales amount of EF with the full payment of the sales amount, on July 2012, 2012.

arrow