Whether the representative director in receipt of a decision to suspend the execution of his/her duties falls under the qualification for preparing securities in the name of the representative director.

The provisional disposition suspending the representative director's execution of duties is a suspension of the representative director's performance of duties, not deprivation of the representative director's qualification, but the representative director's exercise of the right to perform duties is an urgent transfer of securities in the name of another representative director due to the suspension of performance of duties in the Section after a provisional disposition is served, and thus, it cannot be a legitimate exercise of authority, so it constitutes a crime of preparation of qualification-based securities and its exercise.

Articles 215 and 217 of the Criminal Act; Article 714 of the Civil Procedure Act

Defendant 1 and one other

Defendants

Attorney Ji-hun et al.

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 81No1760, 81 elementary381 delivered on December 31, 1986

All appeals are dismissed.

As to the Defendants’ grounds of appeal:

1. The court below recognized the fact that the defendants were engaged in the life and death offered as security by using its adopted evidence without the approval of the release of agricultural cooperatives, the secured party, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of legal principles as to the above recognition process.

There is no reason to discuss this issue.

2. The decision of provisional disposition suspending the exercise of representative director's duties is identical to the theory of lawsuit that the representative director's performance of duties is only suspended and that the representative director's exercise of the right to perform duties is not deprived of the representative director's qualification. However, the representative director's exercise of securities under the name of the representative director who has no right to perform duties due to the suspension of all of the above provisional disposition's execution of duties shall not be a legitimate exercise of authority even if it is an urgent transfer and takeover for the purpose of preventing the suspension of business of the company, and this constitutes a crime of preparation of qualification-based securities and its exercise. Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles, such as the theory of lawsuit,

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Jong-chul (Presiding Justice)