(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.11.03 2016노972 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.11.03 2016노972

업무상배임

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below rendered on the defendant (five million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is a situation that is unfavorable to the defendant that the defendant, as the head of the principal place of business of the victimized company, entered into a contract for the victimized company and supplied the goods on behalf of the victimized company on two occasions, in violation of these occupational duties, so that the defendant requested the F to deliver the goods by entrusting the defendant to the outside place of business operated by the person living together with the victim, and the fact that the defendant did not reach an agreement with the victimized company.

However, according to the fact-finding inquiry about the fact-finding agreement, the defendant's confession and reflects criminal facts, the total amount of damage is not more than KRW 2,875,00,00, and the fact-finding inquiry about the distinguished pressure of the dispute resolution committee in the case of the crime of August 20, 2013, it is recognized that the defendant requested A/S from the defendant on the ground that there is a defect in the part already supplied by the damaged company and received parts from F due to the act of breach of trust in this case and did not pay the F separately. Since the parts supplied by F are also defective, it is recognized that the parts were again supplied from the victimized company, and as a result, the profits and losses suffered by F are not damaged by the damaged company.

Considering such circumstances and other circumstances as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, background and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., various circumstances, which form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, are considered unfair.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The Court shall have jurisdiction over the summary of the evidence and evidence.

참조조문

-형사소송법 제364조 제6항

유사 판례

-대법원 2010. 1. 14. 선고 2009도7737 판결

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2020.08.18 2020고단481

-부산지방법원 2016.09.07 2015고단3164

-대구지방법원 2020.02.19 2019고단6256

-서울고등법원 2020.08.14 2020노153