logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.12.14 2017노3906
업무상배임
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the prosecutor's appeal (misunderstanding the facts) is that the defendant, as the head of the branch office of the victim's Korean Automobile Trade Union, the Gyeonggi-do Trade Union D branch of the Korea Automobile Union (hereinafter "the instant branch"), the education project expenses that the head of the branch office is required to use for the education expenses of local labor union and union members and union members of the branch office (hereinafter "members of the branch office of this case") have been disbursed for the education expenses of the head of the opule minium that received oppy education. This is difficult to be regarded as education at the level of the branch office, and it is 5 million won per year for the 600 members of the branch office of this case, which is used for the improvement of the oppy ability of 1,200,000 won among the 60 members of the branch office of this case. The defendant paid oppy expenses and merchandise coupons to the head of the branch office of this case without any relation to his duties. In light of the facts charged that I did not receive money or merchandise from the defendant, and did not violate the defendant's duty.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine of breach of trust in the course of occupational duties, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court determined as follows: (a) with respect to the disbursement of the school expenses of the eroopian, the portion of the school expenses indicated as “regional labor union and unit management education expenses” regarding the grounds for the subsidization of the educational expenses expenses under the attached Table 1 of the Accounting Rules applicable to the nationwide Automobile Trade Union E-Franchis Trade Union Group and the branches (trade unions). The lower court stated as “regional labor union and unit management expenses,” and did not exclude the disbursement of educational expenses to the head of the branch, who is an executive of the branch; and (b) the branch of

arrow