logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2021.01.21 2020나23890
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance, which exceeds the following amount ordered to be paid.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an organization with the objective of managing A apartment in South-gu K at the port of one’s own (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

2) Defendant B (hereinafter “B”) co-Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) of the first instance trial served as an accounting at the instant apartment management office from July 1, 2016 to December 11, 2018, while engaging in the storage and execution of apartment management fees.

3) The Defendant served as the warden of the instant apartment management office from May 12, 2014 to February 15, 2019.

4) The co-defendant E (hereinafter “E”) of the first instance trial is an accounting firm that performed external audits on the financial statements of the instant apartment in 2015 and 2016.

B. B’s embezzlement of management expenses of the instant apartment, and B’s performance of the Defendant’s duties from July 25, 2016 to October 2018, by altering the advance payment table, and making an additional withdrawal from the account of management expenses of the apartment, and using KRW 310,043,50, the sum of the management expenses of the instant apartment for personal use (hereinafter “the instant embezzlement”). The specific embezzlement amount and content of B are as shown in attached Table 1.

2) During the period of the instant embezzlement crime in B, the head of the Tong, and the official certificate and password for the management of the instant apartment, were managed by B. The Defendant kept the OTP card, and the Defendant, when using the Internet banking, provided that B knew of the number of the OTP card and made it possible to withdraw the management expenses, and did not separately verify the details of the entry and withdrawal of the passbook.

(c)

B’s embezzlement detection 1) On July 11, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into an external audit contract with E on the instant apartment, and E was subject to the external audit of the instant apartment in 2016 (from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016) of the instant apartment.

2) E is September 5, 2017.

arrow