기업의 비자금조성행위와 형사책임
Criminal culpability on the Raising a Slush Fund of Corporation
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The arbitrary user of a slush fund couldn't be estimated at one who keeps other people's property from two aspects. First of all, it couldn't be assured that the arbitrary user is the keeper of a slush fund by breaching of compulsory legislation, because of the possibility of illegal source entrust. Furthermore, because raising a slush fund of the company which might bankrupt is self destruction, this is only unacceptable hypothesis. Therefore the two cases that raises a slush fund are not the works of the company but those of the accused against the intention of company. This must be estimated at the action breaching legal interest. If the raising a slush fund itself can be estimated at embezzlement related with the duty, the action that disturbs finding or pursuing a slush fund raised must be punished as crime of criminal gains' disguise or concealment.
Abstract
The arbitrary user of a slush fund couldn't be estimated at one who keeps other people's property from two aspects. First of all, it couldn't be assured that the arbitrary user is the keeper of a slush fund by breaching of compulsory legislation, because of the possibility of illegal source entrust. Furthermore, because raising a slush fund of the company which might bankrupt is self destruction, this is only unacceptable hypothesis. Therefore the two cases that raises a slush fund are not the works of the company but those of the accused against the intention of company. This must be estimated at the action breaching legal interest. If the raising a slush fund itself can be estimated at embezzlement related with the duty, the action that disturbs finding or pursuing a slush fund raised must be punished as crime of criminal gains' disguise or concealment.
참고문헌 (21)
- "다음 국어사전", ~
- "대판, 2010. 12. 9, 2010도11015", ~
- "대판, 2010, 4. 15, 2009도6634", ~
- "금융실명법 제1조(목적)", ~
- 박상기, "형법각론", pp.385~
- 배종대, "형법각론", pp.475~
- 오영근, "형법각론", pp.532~
- 이재상, "형법각론", pp.362~
- 정성근, "각론", pp.510~
- 진계호, "형법각론", pp.544~
- "민법 제746조(불법원인급여)", ~
- "대판, 1999.6.11, 99도275", ~
- "대판, 1989.9.20, 86도628", ~
- "대판, 1979.11.13, 79다483", ~
- "민법주해(ⅩⅦ) 채권(10)", pp.470~ (2005), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "채권각론", pp.636~ (1995), 박영사
- 이은영, "채권각론", pp.524~ (1992), 박영사
- "독일민법 §817", ~
- "대판, 65.11.30, 65다1837", ~
- "대판, 2001.4.19, 2000다49343", ~
- "대판, 66.2.15, 65다2286", ~
