logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2017.02.08 2016고단1548
업무상배임
Text

Defendant

A and B shall be punished by a fine of 2,50,000 won, by imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months, and by imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A’s occupational breach of trust is a local agricultural official, who is in office as the head of the F Office, and is a person who takes overall charge of duties, such as the selection of a subsidy business operator of a private capital subsidy program, which is implemented in F as an agent for the head of F from July 26, 2013 to August 12, 2014.

According to the "Guidelines for Integrated Management of Subsidies for the purpose of enhancing the transparency of subsidies" of the Jeju Special Self-Governing Do, subsidies for Jeju Special Self-Governing Do shall be granted by the business department after the public announcement of the project or the registration of the project and the application for the project shall be selected by the business department, and subsidies shall not be granted for projects other than those compiled in the project budget.

Private capital subsidies, which were formulated by additional revised budget at the F office in 2013, were formulated in line with the purpose and implementation plan of each project, according to the guidelines for the establishment of the local government’s budget, with the “waterproof and maintenance and repair projects, such as community halls after the aging,” “support for the opening of community halls and senior citizen centers,” and “support for social welfare facilities and projects of self-employed organizations.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, on the ground that the above budget was allotted F under the involvement of the Do Council member G in the Do Council member G, which is called as a member’s project cost, which is called the above budget, with F, decided to grant a free grant of set and container purchase fund using the private capital subsidy budget to the H C management with G-friendly relationship.

Accordingly, on December 30, 2013, the Defendant: “The additional statement of the remaining budget is difficult to execute the budget because it does not conform to the nature and purpose of the prior director’s collection of the budget, the nature of the project, and its purpose;” and “it is impossible to select a specific corporation as a business operator without the procedure of public announcement of the project, and pay subsidies” from K, a public official in charge of the residents’ self-governing division, which is the budget execution department, at the F Office located in Seopopo City I, Seopo-si, 2013, upon receiving a report, ordered H farming association to collect agricultural products on December 30, 2013.

arrow