beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. On October 11, 2012, the Defendant: (a) at the time when the Defendant borrowed KRW 100 million from the Victim L (hereinafter “instant loan”); (b) the Defendant, as the representative director of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), was promoting projects related to online sports (such as filing an application for rating review with the Game Rating Board around July 2012; (c) around August 2012, 2012, the Defendant participated in the 5 billion capital increase of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”)’s KRW 1.5 billion in the name of G and agreed to receive a return of the said capital increase again from F; and (c) the Defendant granted the “F” to the victim for the purpose of paying interest on the instant loan.
In light of these circumstances, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, even though the Defendant had the intent to repay at the time of borrowing the case.
B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is D’s representative director, who is a game products production, development, and distribution company. The Defendant had difficulty in raising the company’s funds due to the delay in rating review on the game products developed by the said D.
Therefore, the defendant agreed that F will participate in F's capital increase of KRW 5 billion around August 2012, and D will return the above capital increase from F in the form of investment again with the purpose of raising funds for D's operation by utilizing F's credit, which is a listed company operated by E.
Although the Defendant participated in the F’s capital increase of KRW 4.9 billion by investing KRW 1.5 billion in the name of G around September 2012, the rating review continued to delay, and the amount equivalent to the above capital increase as agreed from F was not returned in the form of investment.