logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.09.14 2016고합736
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. From December 3, 2013 to January 23, 2015, the Defendant served as the representative director of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “damage Co., Ltd”) with the F3th floor located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si E (hereinafter “Damage Co., Ltd”).

A. A. Around January 15, 2014, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (afford) has a duty to properly evaluate the value of G water datum by properly assessing the value of G water datum in the office of the victimized company on January 31, 2014, and transfer it to an appropriate price. Around January 15, 2014, the Defendant had a duty to obtain approval when it is excessively assessed.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, in violation of his duties, informed the damaged company’s general meeting of shareholders or the board of directors of the fact that the property of the equipment of G water datum was excessively assessed, or did not comply with the procedures prescribed by the Commercial Act such as the procedure for approval of the general meeting of shareholders under the Commercial Act, but assessed the equipment of G water datum at KRW 4,285,480,574, and caused the victimized company to acquire the equipment of G water datum at KRW 1,078,393,698.

B. On April 25, 2013, when preparing for the opening point of Gwon point in a private business chain, the Defendant: (a) drafted an exclusive forest business agreement to pay the profits accrued under the name of H and the luxal lux in the capacity of representative of G Suwon; (b) subsequently, as the Defendant transferred the above contract comprehensively to the damaged company, the Defendant, as the representative director of the victimized company, has a duty to notify the board of directors of the victimized company of the important facts of the contract and obtain approval from the board of directors.

Nevertheless, the defendant violates his duties.

arrow