logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.05.01 2015고합186
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On June 3, 2011, the Defendant was appointed as a temporary president of C Housing Redevelopment Association (hereinafter referred to as “victim Cooperative”) by the Seoul Central District Court. On September 23, 2011, when the board of representatives of the Victim Cooperative adopted a resolution for dissolution on September 23, 2011, the Defendant was appointed as a liquidator of the Victim Cooperative on September 23, 2011. Since the liquidator was registered on September 27, 2011, the Defendant was obligated to preserve the property of the Cooperative or to perform the duties to preserve the property of the Cooperative members when he/she performs the duties of care of a good manager when a third party files a lawsuit against the Cooperative.

Around July 14, 2011, the Defendant received a payment order (Seoul Central District Court 201j 55985 unfair profit return) from the court that requested the Seoul Central District Court to pay KRW 574,864,920 (the above Seoul Central District Court 201J 201) to a certified judicial scrivener E who had conducted affairs such as registration, deposit, consultation, etc. related to the redevelopment project of the victim union from around 2002 to around 2007, to provide the victim union with the amount of KRW 574,864,920, including the fees, fees, registration fees, value added tax, etc. that the victim union did not pay to the Seoul Central District Court around July 8, 201, the Defendant received the payment order (the above Seoul Central District Court 201j 201 and the duty of due care of a good manager to file an objection within the legitimate period for filing the objection and file a lawsuit. However, the Defendant did not raise an objection within two weeks of the period for filing the payment order.

Accordingly, the defendant's payment order that became final and conclusive.

arrow