In writing only: email and e-filing

KSTGeneral information, not legal advice

Open Decision Ledger · Criminal law

The transferor's own duty to supply opposition requirements before issuance

Supreme Court, June 4, 2020, 2015Do6057 (judgment)

Case name: 배임[주권발행 전 주식의 이중양도 사건]

Official text on the National Law Information Center

  1. Question

    Where a transferor of shares issued before the share certificate does not supply dated notice or consent allowing the transferee to oppose third parties and then disposes of the same shares to another person, does the transferor commit breach of trust under Article 355(2) of the Criminal Act, given what it means to handle another's affairs?

  2. Holding

    No. The Court held that breach of trust requires the offender to stand in a position of handling another's affairs, and that such handling rests on a relationship of trust going beyond a simple debtor-creditor relationship, under which the person protects or manages the other's property. A transferee of pre-certificate shares may, absent special circumstances, prove the acquisition on its own and demand registration without the transferor's help, so the transferor's debt to supply dated notice or consent is his own affair. He is not handling the transferee's affairs, and disposing of the shares otherwise does not constitute the offence.

    Summary of the holding, verbatim

    따라서 양도인이 양수인으로 하여금 회사 이외의 제3자에게 대항할 수 있도록 확정일자 있는 증서에 의한 양도통지 또는 승낙을 갖추어 주어야 할 채무를 부담한다 하더라도 이는 자기의 사무라고 보아야 하고, 이를 양수인과의 신임관계에 기초하여 양수인의 사무를 맡아 처리하는 것으로 볼 수 없다.

    Unofficial English translation

    Accordingly, even if the transferor bears the obligation to provide the transferee with a notice of transfer or an approval in an instrument bearing a fixed date so as to enable the transferee to assert the transfer against third parties other than the company, this must be regarded as the transferor's own affairs, and it cannot be regarded as the transferee's affairs being taken over and handled on the basis of a fiduciary relationship with the transferee.
  3. Disposition

    Reversed and remanded Stated in the decision

    원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 수원지방법원에 환송한다.

    Unofficial English translation

    The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Suwon District Court.
  4. Form of the test

    Elements stated Stated in the decision

    여기에서 ‘타인의 사무’를 처리한다고 하려면 당사자 관계의 본질적 내용이 단순한 채권채무 관계를 넘어서 그들 간의 신임관계에 기초하여 타인의 재산을 보호 또는 관리하는 데 있어야 하고

    Unofficial English translation

    In order to say that one handles 'another's affairs' here, the essential content of the relationship between the parties must go beyond a simple debtor-creditor relationship and must lie in protecting or managing another's property on the basis of a fiduciary relationship between them; and
  5. Factors

    • 당사자 관계의 본질적 내용이 단순한 채권채무 관계를 넘어서 그들 간의 신임관계에 기초하여 타인의 재산을 보호 또는 관리하는 데 있어야 하고
    • 그 사무가 타인의 사무가 아니고 자기의 사무라면 그 사무의 처리가 타인에게 이익이 되어 타인에 대하여 이를 처리할 의무를 부담하는 경우라도 그는 타인의 사무를 처리하는 자에 해당하지 아니한다.
    • 주권발행 전 주식의 양도는 양도인과 양수인의 의사표시만으로 효력이 발생한다.
    • 양도인이 양수인으로 하여금 회사 이외의 제3자에게 대항할 수 있도록 확정일자 있는 증서에 의한 양도통지 또는 승낙을 갖추어 주어야 할 채무를 부담한다 하더라도 이는 자기의 사무라고 보아야 하고

    Unofficial English translation

    • the essential content of the relationship between the parties must go beyond a simple debtor-creditor relationship and must lie in protecting or managing another's property on the basis of a fiduciary relationship between them; and

    • even if the handling of an affair is not another's affair but one's own affair and the handling thereof benefits another and imposes on him a duty owed to that other to handle it, he does not fall under a person handling another's affairs.

    • A transfer of shares for which share certificates have not yet been issued takes effect by the manifestations of intention of the transferor and the transferee alone.

    • Even if the transferor bears the obligation to provide the transferee with a notice of transfer or an approval in an instrument bearing a fixed date so as to enable the transferee to assert the transfer against third parties other than the company, this must be regarded as the transferor's own affairs, and

  6. Relation to precedent

    Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision

    대법원 2011. 1. 20. 선고 2008도10479 전원합의체 판결(공2011상, 482)

    Unofficial English translation

    Supreme Court en banc Judgment 2008Do10479 decided January 20, 2011 (Gong 2011 Sang, 482)

    Decisions referred to

    [1] 대법원 2011. 1. 20. 선고 2008도10479 전원합의체 판결(공2011상, 482), 대법원 2014. 8. 21. 선고 2014도3363 전원합의체 판결(공2014하, 1923), 대법원 2020. 2. 20. 선고 2019도9756 전원합의체 판결(공2020상, 723) / [2] 대법원 2019. 4. 25. 선고 2017다21176 판결(공2019상, 1170)

  7. Burden of proof

    Not addressed Not in the decision

  8. Open question and revisit condition

    If a transferor undertakes by contract to hold and manage the transferee's shares as a whole, can the duty to supply dated notice or consent become another's affairs under Article 355(2) of the Criminal Act?

    The remand judgment of the Suwon District Court, once it decides the charge on the standard stated here, will show how the rule is applied to a pre-certificate share transfer. A later en banc decision revising what counts as handling another's affairs under Article 355(2) of the Criminal Act, or an amendment to that Article, would require this entry to be read again.

Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check

8 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25

A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on all 8 axes.

Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)

Lower-court contrast & scope of application

Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding

Lower-court context: The Suwon District Court, in its judgment of 10 April 2015 (2014No3978), affirmed the first-instance judgment finding the defendant guilty. It held that the defendant owed a duty to supply the transferee with dated notice or consent allowing opposition against third parties, that he transferred the 30,000 shares to a third party without doing so, thereby obtaining a property gain of 30,000 shares of unknown market value and causing the victim a loss of the same amount.

Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that the duty to supply the requirements for opposing third parties was the defendant's own civil obligation and could not be another's affairs, so he was not in the position of handling another's affairs. The court below nevertheless treated him as being in that position and found the charge proved, which was a misreading of the meaning of handling another's affairs in breach of trust. The judgment was reversed and remanded, and the Court omitted any decision on the remaining grounds of appeal.

Distinguishing conditions

  • A relationship in which the transferor holds the transferee's property on a basis of trust and protects or manages it, so that the substance of the parties' relationship goes beyond a simple debtor-creditor relationship.
  • Special circumstances in which the transferee cannot prove its acquisition on its own and demand registration from the company without the transferor's help, since the Court's reasoning rests on the transferee being able to do so.
  • A task that is not the transferor's own affair but whose handling benefits the other party and creates an obligation toward that party, where the substance of the relationship still rests on trust.

Record verification notes

Confirm first that the transaction is a transfer of shares issued before the share certificate, since the reasoning turns on the transferee being able to demand registration in its own name without the transferor's help, absent special circumstances. Then identify the duty said to have been breached and ask whether it is the accused's own civil debt, as the Court held here, or a duty resting on a relationship of trust under which he protected or managed the victim's property.

From the official text

Points at issue

[1] 배임죄에서 ‘타인의 사무’를 처리한다는 것의 의미 [2] 주권발행 전 주식에 대한 양도계약에서 양도인이 양수인으로 하여금 회사 이외의 제3자에게 대항할 수 있도록 확정일자 있는 증서에 의한 양도통지 또는 승낙을 갖추어 주지 아니하고 위 주식을 다른 사람에게 처분한 경우, 배임죄가 성립하는지 여부(소극)

Unofficial English translation

[1] The meaning of handling 'another's affairs' in the offense of breach of trust [2] Where, under a transfer agreement for shares for which share certificates have not yet been issued, the transferor fails to provide the transferee with a notice of transfer or an approval in an instrument bearing a fixed date, so as to enable the transferee to assert the transfer against third parties other than the company, and disposes of the shares to another person, whether the offense of breach of trust is established (negative)

Summary of the holding

[1] 배임죄는 타인의 사무를 처리하는 자가 그 임무에 위배하는 행위로 재산상 이익을 취득하여 사무의 주체인 타인에게 손해를 가함으로써 성립하므로 범죄의 주체는 타인의 사무를 처리하는 지위에 있어야 한다. 여기에서 ‘타인의 사무’를 처리한다고 하려면 당사자 관계의 본질적 내용이 단순한 채권채무 관계를 넘어서 그들 간의 신임관계에 기초하여 타인의 재산을 보호 또는 관리하는 데 있어야 하고, 그 사무가 타인의 사무가 아니고 자기의 사무라면 그 사무의 처리가 타인에게 이익이 되어 타인에 대하여 이를 처리할 의무를 부담하는 경우라도 그는 타인의 사무를 처리하는 자에 해당하지 아니한다. [2] 주권발행 전 주식의 양도는 양도인과 양수인의 의사표시만으로 효력이 발생한다. 그 주식 양수인은 특별한 사정이 없는 한 양도인의 협력을 받을 필요 없이 단독으로 자신이 주식을 양수한 사실을 증명함으로써 회사에 대하여 명의개서를 청구할 수 있다. 따라서 양도인이 양수인으로 하여금 회사 이외의 제3자에게 대항할 수 있도록 확정일자 있는 증서에 의한 양도통지 또는 승낙을 갖추어 주어야 할 채무를 부담한다 하더라도 이는 자기의 사무라고 보아야 하고, 이를 양수인과의 신임관계에 기초하여 양수인의 사무를 맡아 처리하는 것으로 볼 수 없다. 그러므로 주권발행 전 주식에 대한 양도계약에서의 양도인은 양수인에 대하여 그의 사무를 처리하는 지위에 있지 아니하여, 양도인이 위와 같은 제3자에 대한 대항요건을 갖추어 주지 아니하고 이를 타에 처분하였다 하더라도 형법상 배임죄가 성립하는 것은 아니다.

Order

원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 수원지방법원에 환송한다.

Unofficial English translation

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Suwon District Court.

Provisions referred to

[1] 형법 제355조 제2항 [2] 형법 제355조 제2항

Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.

Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.

Back to the ledger
You are reading PRO SE
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com