logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2013.03.13 2012고정197
업무상배임미수
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the auditor of the council of occupants' representatives of the Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan City D Apartment, and the defendant B is the chairman of the council of occupants' representatives of the above apartment.

On February 2, 2011, the Defendants ordered the repair and painting of the outer wall of the above D apartment and carried out the bidding procedure, and there was a duty to fairly and faithfully perform the affairs such as the selection of the construction company and the payment of construction cost.

Nevertheless, the Defendants violated their duties and let a limited company E carry out construction work, unfilled the construction cost, and publicly recruited the difference as a device.

From March 201, the Defendants stated that “F” restaurants in the vicinity of the foregoing D apartment, “B” (“F”) are directors of the limited liability company E, and that “B shall perform construction works in the name of E, and request for rebates of KRW 10 million from the construction cost.” The Defendants shall calculate the estimated construction cost into KRW 68 million, which is less than the actual 58 million, and shall accept the tender, and thereafter, the Defendants shall have the limited liability company that has actually been awarded the contract for the construction, and thereafter, shall have the limited liability company that has actually been awarded the contract.

After the completion of the above construction work on May 201, the Defendants demanded 10 million won, which was promised to H and G, a director of the limited liability company E, as above.

However, G was refused to resolve conflicts with the Defendants due to the payment of construction cost.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to acquire 10 million won by violating their duties and failed to bring about a attempted crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness G, H and I;

1. Investigation report (related to J currency);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes related to painting work;

1. Relevant Articles 359, 356, 355 (2) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

arrow