logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.06.11 2015도1910
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, found Defendant A guilty of both the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter “Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) due to lending Q Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Q”) among the facts charged in the instant case and the violation of the Capital Market and Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (hereinafter “Capital Markets Act”) due to fraudulent illegal transactions through false representation of important matters (excluding the portion on which the lower court acquitted Defendant A of the grounds for appeal). In so doing, it did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on “act of breach of trust” in the crime of breach of trust or “an illegal

Meanwhile, Defendant A appealed to the remaining guilty portion of the judgment of the court below, but there is no statement in the appellate brief that there is no objection to the appellate brief and there is no such statement in the petition of appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, found the following: (a) the charge of violating the Specific Economic Crimes Act (excluding the part that acquitted Defendant B of the grounds for appeal); (b) the charge of offering security for Q as security; (c) the charge of occupational breach of trust due to the provision of security for N (hereinafter “N”); (d) the violation of the Specific Economic Crimes Act (Misappropriation) against the victim S.; and (e) the important matters.

arrow