logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2016.06.10 2015노474
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for four years and for three years, respectively.

, however, the defendant.

Reasons

1. Defendant A was the actual owner of the interest of the major shareholder of H (hereinafter “victim Company”) located in Nam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City from January 4, 2008 to Y, and was actually engaged in overall affairs such as the financial affairs and personnel affairs of the Victim Company. Defendant B was a person holding office as the representative director of the Victim Company from February 4, 2008 to January 19, 2009 and was in the position to handle the affairs of the Victim Company at that time.

On the other hand, according to the above position, the Defendants had a duty to protect the pecuniary interests of the victim company by failing to conclude a contract that results in the burden or loss of the victim company for their own or a third party's interest.

Nevertheless, around December 2007, the Defendants agreed to sell all the shares and management rights of the victim company owned by the Defendant A to the Defendant B with the amount of KRW 30 billion. As such, the relationship between the Defendant B and the Defendant B did not have sufficient means to prepare the purchase fund, Defendant A established an I Co., Ltd., a special purpose corporation for the operation of the victim company (hereinafter “I”) and transferred the shares of the victim company to I, Defendant B was assigned to the representative director of the victim company, and Defendant B was assigned to the Defendant B as the representative director of the victim company, and the above amount was acquired by Defendant A by having I receive the above amount of KRW 30 billion from the conduct under the joint and several guarantee of the victim company, and the Defendant B, as the representative director of the victim company, paid KRW 30 billion to I with the funds created by attracting investors of the second victim company, and conspired to purchase the victim company by acquiring the victim company from the Defendant A.

According to the above public offering, the Defendants received a loan of KRW 30 billion from around January 9, 2008 to Gyeongnam-do (hereinafter “instant loan”), and each victim company perform the above duties.

arrow