logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2013.08.05 2013고정111
업무상배임
Text

Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that Defendant A established and operated the Victim H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Corporation”) with the purpose of collective cultivation and joint production in the sun-math and medicinal banks by lending the name of G, which was known to Pyeongtaek on October 1, 2009, and Defendant B, C, and D are the substantial operators of the Victim Corporation. Defendant B, C, and Defendant E are the directors of each victim corporation, and the auditors of each victim corporation.

Defendant

A, as seen above, while establishing and operating a victim corporation, was at issue on February 201, and the embezzlement for the funds of the victim corporation was filed, and the representative director of the victim corporation was changed to I on May 13, 201 through a resolution of the board of directors and lost the right to operate the victim corporation.

As above, Defendant A: (a) confirmed that Defendant B and C did not pay KRW 30,30,000,000 which was to be paid in the course of establishing the original victim corporation; and (b) filed a claim for the payment of share capital and a provisional attachment against Defendant B and C with the Daejeon District Court in order to receive the investment from Defendant B and C; and (c) confirmed that Defendant A voluntarily used the funds of the victim corporation (the judgment was finalized on February 21, 2012 by being sentenced to a fine of KRW 2 million on the ground that Defendant A embezzled the funds of the victim corporation from the Daejeon District Court Branch of the Daejeon District Court on January 30, 2012). In support of the above Incheon District Court, Defendant A filed a lawsuit seeking the return of the amount of embezzlement against Defendant B.

As seen above, when the Defendants were at risk of causing property damage by being subject to civil action by the victim corporation, the Defendants conspired to dismiss I from the representative director and dismiss I and friendly G from office by resolution of the board of directors around April 20, 2012, and Defendant C was appointed as the representative director of the victim corporation, and as such, Defendant C was in bad faith in operating the victim corporation.

arrow