logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2019.11.29 2017가합101398
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a stock company with the purpose of the fire partition system construction business, and the Defendant served from June 2007 to January 5, 2017 as the Plaintiff’s accounting staff and was in charge of accounting, accounting, and affairs.

B. B. On November 30, 2016, C and C, the representative director of the Plaintiff Company, and C, as the wife of C and C, agreed to transfer management rights by transferring 100% of the Plaintiff Company’s shares to E without compensation, but the Plaintiff Company paid the amount equivalent to C and D’s liabilities to the Plaintiff Company corresponding to C and D’s financial institutions, etc. listed in the agreement, as the unpaid benefits and retirement allowances.

C. E was appointed as the representative director of the Plaintiff Company on December 1, 2016.

Plaintiff

The representative E of the company: (a) the Defendant, at the time of his employment, remitted money from the Plaintiff’s company’s account to the Defendant’s account as salary, embezzled KRW 25 million, and (b) arbitrarily wired or withdrawn money from the Plaintiff’s company’s account to the Defendant’s account in cash, and embezzled KRW 89 million in total; (c) at his discretion, he used KRW 22 million in the corporate card (credit card) under the Plaintiff’s name; and (d) arbitrarily opened the mobile phone under the Plaintiff’s name and used it at its expense; and (e) F, G, H, and I filed a complaint as a crime of occupational embezzlement against suspicion of embezzlement, such as embezzlement of 193 million won in the name of his employee, even if the Plaintiff was not an employee of the Plaintiff company.

However, on June 26, 2018, the Defendant received the disposition of non-prosecution (No. 25899) from a public prosecutor in charge of the Security Office of the Suwon District Public Prosecutor's Office (No. 2589) who was not guilty of all of the above complaints.

(hereinafter referred to as “related criminal case”). (e)

For this reason,

arrow