logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2015.08.19 2014고합277
특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(배임)
Text

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for five years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Criminal facts

Defendant

B From February 4, 2008 to January 19, 2009, as the representative director of the victim H (a company operating H golf courses, hereinafter referred to as “victim”) located in Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Seoul and was in a position to handle the affairs of the victim company, and accordingly, there was a duty to protect the victim company’s property interests by failing to enter into a contract that results in the victim company’s burden or loss for its own or a third party’s interest.

Nevertheless, around January 9, 2008, Defendant B obtained a loan of KRW 30 billion from Gyeongnam Bank (hereinafter “I”), in violation of the above duties with respect to the victim company (hereinafter “instant loan”). On March 3, 2008, Defendant B caused the victim company to jointly and severally guarantee the Defendant Company’s debt of the I’s instant loan, thereby having I obtain property benefits equivalent to KRW 30 billion and suffered property damages equivalent to the same amount from the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant B’s partial statement

1. The defendant B and his defense counsel ordered the defendant B, who was in office of the representative director of the victim company at the time when the defendant A, who actually manages the victim company, to take over all the shares held by the other major shareholders of the victim company, and to take over the company's management of the victim company, and to jointly and severally guarantee the debt of this case at the time of the joint and several guarantee, because the defendant B merely follow the direction and did not have the intent of occupational breach of trust at the time of the above joint and several guarantee. However, the defendant B asserted that there was no criminal intent of occupational breach of trust.

arrow