beta
Text
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant: (a) was engaged in real estate development business; (b) recommended the victims to purchase a number of land from around 2005 to make real estate investment in the victim B to purchase and resell the land at Kimhae-si; (c) recommended the victims to purchase real estate for the benefit of their profits; (d) manage the real estate until the purchase price is resold; (e) recommended the timing of resale and the other party; and (e) recommended sales contracts and registration by proxy; and (e)
During that period, the defendant is entitled to cut off land in the name of a corporation.
I I would like to make a legal entity one, which received KRW 50 million from the injured party, and established D (hereinafter “D”) in the name of the injured party on April 11, 2006. After substantially operating D from that time, I would be engaged in the management of the injured party’s land for Kimhae-si E, F, G, H, I, J, K, K, and L (hereinafter “each land of this case”).
The Defendant, including each of the instant lands around Mar. 2008, intended to operate a logistics warehouse development project on the NJ site in Kimhae-si, Kim Jong-si, Kim Jong-si, and would sell the victim with “I wish to purchase the new land at O in KRW 2 billion.”
Inasmuch as the sale of each of the instant lands was delegated, there was a duty to arbitrarily provide each of the instant lands as collateral and not to inflict damage on the victim.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, at around July 5, 2008, entered into an agreement with D and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “O”) on the seller of each of the instant lands at the Defendant’s personal office located in Kimhae-si P (hereinafter “O”) to pay the buyer to the victim the land price of KRW 2 billion (hereinafter “instant sales agreement”), and carried out a logistics creation project, and the money is insufficient. Accordingly, each of the instant contracts is in violation of the aforementioned occupational duties.