logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.06.02 2016노4672
업무상횡령
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant, without the intention to hold a board of directors meeting from the beginning, disposes of the property of the victim C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”) without permission; and (b) where part of the proceeds from the sale is actually used for the repayment of loans under the name of the victim Co., Ltd., which can be seen as the Defendant’s personal obligation; (c) the Defendant fully recognizes the fact that the Defendant embezzled the property owned by the victim’s company for his or

In light of the above, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On June 29, 201, the Defendant, as the representative director of the victim company for the purpose of plastic manufacture and wholesale and retail business, operated D and the above companies jointly.

On June 2012, the Defendant arbitrarily sold 15 million won to G, without a resolution of the board of directors, while keeping raw materials, etc. related to the manufacture of plastics owned by the victim company for the sake of the victim company. On August 2012, the Defendant sold the compact press machines owned by the victim company to G at his own discretion without a resolution of the board of directors, while keeping the compact press machines owned by the victim company for business purposes.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the property of the victim company for business purposes.

B. The lower court’s judgment, based on the records, acknowledged the following facts, such as the details of the establishment and operation of the victim company, the circumstances leading up to the occurrence of the dispute regarding the liquidation of the victim company between the Defendant and D, and, based on such facts, intended to dispose of the raw materials and machinery owned by the victim (hereinafter “the instant raw materials and machinery”) in violation of the consignment relationship with the victim company for the benefit of himself/herself or a third party.

arrow