The case holding that it constitutes a crime of breach of trust where the president of a credit union voluntarily withdraws the deposits received from non-members and uses them to discount bills, etc.

If the president of a credit union does not keep account books and records in violation of his/her duties, received deposits from non-members at the office of the union, delivered a regular deposit certificate prepared in the name of the union, and deposited the deposits to the union once again, and then arbitrarily withdrawn the deposit, and if the credit is engaged in the business of discount of bills, such as lending money issued or endorsed by bad persons, such transaction cannot be deemed as a personal transaction of the defendant who is not related to the union, and thus, the judgment of the court below which recognized the crime of breach of trust is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the person who administers another's business.

Article 355(2) of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Park Woo-young

Seoul High Court Decision 88No2871 delivered on January 30, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

1. Judgment on the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 3 by the defense counsel

If the evidence admitted by the court below and the court of first instance examined it by comparing it with the records, it cannot be deemed that there was an error of violation of the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence or misapprehension of the legal principles as to the crime of breach of trust, as in the process of finding facts by the court below. Thus, there is no

2. Determination on the ground of appeal No. 2

As duly established by the court below, if the defendant, as the president of the commercial credit cooperative (hereinafter referred to as the "cooperative") which is a non-profit corporation established under the Credit Unions Act, received deposits from non-member cooperatives in violation of his/her duty and did not keep account books and records, delivered the certificate of regular deposit made in the name of the cooperative, as in the case of receiving deposits from non-member cooperatives, and then delivered the certificate of regular deposit made in the name of the cooperative, as in the case of receiving deposits from the union members, and then arbitrarily deposited the deposits from the union, voluntarily withdrawn the deposits from the union, and provided money for lending the bills issued or endorsed by non-member cooperatives, the decision of the court below with the same purport is without merit.

3. Determination as to the front part of the ground of appeal No. 3

Even if a juristic person is dissolved, the dissolved juristic person has the right and bears obligations within the scope of the purpose of the liquidation, and the liquidator represents the external juristic person within the scope of the ability of the liquidated juristic person until the liquidation is completed. Therefore, there is no reason to conduct this review.

4. Therefore, the defendant's appeal shall be dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Justice)