(영문) 부산지방법원 2008.8.7.선고 2008노403 판결

The defendant shall be punished by a fine of 2,00,000 won. If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period calculated by converting 60,000 won into one day: Provided, That the fractional amount shall be discarded.

Reasons

1. Summary of the prosecutor's grounds for appeal;

Even though 'the act of putting up a plate' is a practice in the drinking industry, there is no evidence to deem that the victim B beverage corporation had urged and instructed the above act, and rather, the crime of this case should be deemed to have been committed in order to receive performance allowances through the improvement of business performance at the business location of the victimized company. In addition, in light of the circumstances where the above act of the business location is not justified for the sales of dumping by the business members including the defendant, and the business members including the defendant, etc. made payment of damages by depositing the difference from the dumping act into the company, it shall be deemed that the defendant had the intention of breach of trust.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. Summary of the facts charged in this case

From December 1, 1998 to October 31, 2005, the Defendant engaged in drinking water sales and water collection business while working as a business employee at the north Busan Branch of the Victim B beverage Co., Ltd. from around December 1, 2005. From around April 4, 2005 to October 20, 2005, the Defendant violated his occupational duties to sell drinking water at the price determined by the victim while supplying drinking water to C during the period from April 4, 2005, and sold the drinking water at a lower price than that determined by the victim, thereby causing property damage equivalent to KRW 16,23,600 to the victim. From April 1, 2004 to October 24, 2005, the Defendant sold the drinking water at a lower price than that determined by the victim’s arbitrarily to five business partners, as stated in the annexed Table of Crimes, and the amount of property damage equivalent to KRW 51,279,600,000.

B. The judgment of the court below

As to the above facts charged, the court below acquitted the defendant for the following reasons.

The evidence for the proof of the facts charged in the instant case lies in the descriptions of D and E of the prosecution examination protocol, the police statement of D on the suspect examination protocol, the statement of the police statement of D on the defendant, the statement of the person who prepared the defendant, the explanatory note, and each letter

According to the witness D's statement "the current status of storage of each warehouse" attached to the police investigation protocol (2 times) for the defendant, the following facts are that ① beverage manufacturers including victim companies have long been urged to impose excessive sales targets on the business employees through the heads of every 20 years (in the case of the victim company, at least 20 years) and the heads of branch offices have failed to sell these targets to the business employees, so that the business employees can not report the sales proceeds to the above 0-year sales (the pre-sales sales, i.e., the sale proceeds) and deposit the sales proceeds with the company after finding out the products of the above 0-year sales proceeds from the above 0-year sales proceeds, and most business employees including the defendant did not achieve sales targets at the above 0-year sales proceeds from the above 0-year sales proceeds from the company, and the company had no sales proceeds from the above 20-year sales proceeds from the company's funds at the above 0-year sales proceeds.

3. The judgment of this Court

In light of the following circumstances, i.e., B beverage companies (hereinafter referred to as "victims company") that lawfully adopted and investigated evidence, the court below took measures to eradicate so-called "markets" and "dumping sales" long-term problems, and to prevent entry of sales details into the computer system at prices below that is less than 0, and the defendant also knew such circumstances, and even around 203 or 204, there was a date for the defendant's parents to compensate for damages in the above company's 10,000 won as well as for the above 0-year sales volume of the company's 0-year sales volume and 0-year sales volume of the company's sales volume. However, the defendant's assertion that the above 0-year sales volume of the company's 0-year sales volume and 0-year sales volume of the company's 0-year sales volume and 0-year sales volume of the company's 1.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the prosecutor's appeal is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision is

Criminal facts

The Defendant, from December 1, 1998 to October 31, 2005, worked as a member of the business in North Korea of the Victim B beverage Company and engaged in the business of selling drinking water and collecting water.

From April 4, 2005 to October 20, 205, the Defendant supplied drinking water to C, a company located in Busan Young-gu, Busan Metropolitan City, and sold at a price lower than that set by the victim, thereby causing property damage equivalent to KRW 16,233,600, and had C gain property profit equivalent to the same amount. From April 2004 to October 24 of the same year, the Defendant, from around October 2004, sold drinking water at a price lower than that set by the victim, thereby gaining property profit equivalent to KRW 16,233,60, and had C gain property profit equivalent to the same amount. In addition, from April 2004 to October 24 of the same year, the Defendant, by selling drinking water at a price lower than that set by the victim. The Defendant inflicted property damage equivalent to KRW 51,792,600, in total, on the part of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

Omission

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the facts constituting the crime and the selection of the kind of punishment;

inclusive, Articles 356 and 355(2) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Fine)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act