logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.28 2012고합1768
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)등
Text

1. Defendant A’s imprisonment with prison labor and Defendant B’s fine of 20,000,000 won, respectively.

2. The defendant A: Provided, That the defendant A.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a major shareholder and representative director who hold 3.57% of shares in B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) from March 6, 2006 to September 20, 201 and have overall control over the overall management of B, such as exercising overall control over the credit collection business. Defendant B is a corporation that is engaged in the receipt of deposits, installment savings, and lending of funds.

1. Defendant A

A. Since a mutual savings bank violates the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Persons (Misappropriation) carries out loan business as resources, a mutual savings bank’s executive officers and employees are obliged to evaluate the financial capacity and credit standing of a debtor when they deal with loan business, to thoroughly analyze the possibility of collecting claims, risk characteristics, etc. in consideration of the purpose and place of the relevant loan, the size and period of use of required funds, the actual borrower’s payment, etc., and to obtain a guarantee certificate issued by a security or guarantee agency, etc. for the collection of claims, and to ensure that strict examination and analysis of loans and measures for preserving claims are conducted in accordance with statutes and regulations on internal loan examination to ensure that the soundness and profitability of loans are maintained to prevent damage to a savings bank.

After transferring L to L, the Defendant transferred M Co., Ltd. operated by the Defendant to L, and used part of the loan to L for business purpose, and used it by the Defendant, by borrowing from B the name of another person, and used it as operating funds of the futures option account by borrowing it from B.

Notwithstanding that the Defendant did not plan to receive fishery products from N (N) Co., Ltd. (N (hereinafter “N”) as collateral on May 6, 2008, the Defendant first granted a loan to employees in charge of lending B, in violation of his/her occupational duty to manage the lending business so as not to incur any loss to the Savings Bank, and later, fishery products will have been stored without the framework as collateral.

arrow