2012 Highest 6545 Occupational Breach of Trust

○○, Other

Residence Busan Busan Jin-gu

Original domicile Busan Jin-gu

He/she shall hold a public trial on his/her pencopic pen and scopic pen;

Law Firm Maritime Affairs & Fisheries, Attorneys Go Jae-in

October 24, 2012

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Criminal facts

From April 2007, the Defendant was the president of the Victim Association of 00 C&M market (100 109 persons) in Busan J&M market from around 000 to the Busan J&M market (18 persons in charge of the external business of 00 C&M market) in contact with the above 00 E&M market.

Around April 19, 2011, the Defendant was transferred from the Defendant’s individual passbook (10 million won bank) to the Defendant’s individual passbook (10 million won bank) when the mutual agreement was reached due to the Small and Medium Business Administration’s arbitration between the Defendant and the Defendant who represented the said market merchants.

In this case, the president of the ○○ Alley-market merchants' association had a duty to use the win-win development fund for the benefit of all merchants in accordance with the purport of all merchants.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not notify all merchants of the receipt of the win-win development fund, the amount of the win-win development fund, etc., without gathering opinions from the user, and did not intend to sell a second-story building with no value as a parking lot for the use of the parking lot at a low price.

On January 10, 2012, the Defendant sold to the victims an appraisal of KRW 2770,000,000 owned by the Defendant to use in the above market as a parking lot for the use of KRW 38,230,000,000 for the above market. At around that time, the Defendant received the payment of the purchase price from the above Collaborative Development Fund that was kept by the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant acquired the pecuniary benefits of KRW 15770,00,000 from the victim’s property benefits and sustained property damage equivalent to the same amount on the merchants’ associations of the ○○ Market and the ○○ Market.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Some statements made to the accused in the first prosecutor's office (including the part concerning the examination of suspect, oO, o00 statements);

1. Part of the first prosecutorial statement against the Defendant (including the part of the statement made by the Defendant, ○○, ○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○, and ○○○○○)

1. Statement made by each prosecutor on the ○○, ○○, ○○, Kim○, ○○, and ○○○;

1. Each appraisal report;

1. A copy of a sales contract of commercial housing;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 356 and 355(2) of the Criminal Act

Grounds for sentencing

1. Scope of recommendations: Basic area of Type II of Misappropriation (one year to three years);

2. Determination of sentence: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; and (b) the Defendant cancelled the instant real estate sales contract and returned the full amount of the sales price to the Defendant is a summary of sentencing favorable to the Defendant. However, the Defendant violated his duties and caused confusion and disputes in the entire market by violating his duties even though it was fairly and appropriately used after gathering opinions from the entire merchants; (c) even until now, a considerable number of merchants have failed to reach an agreement thereon, who want to be punished against the Defendant, shall be considered as the factors of sentencing disadvantageous to the Defendant; and (d) other factors of sentencing, such as the background, motive, means and method leading up to the instant crime, and circumstances after committing the instant crime, etc., are considered as the factors of sentencing unfavorable to the Defendant.

Judges Song Jae-soo