기업범죄에 있어서 법인의 책임과 배임죄의 성부

The present Criminal Act art. 355 ② prescribed that a person who, administering another’s business, obtains pecuniary advantage or causes a third person to do so from another in violation of ones duty, thereby causing loss to such person, shall be punished by penal servitude for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding fifteen million Won. And Criminal Act art. 356 prescribed about occupational breach of trust. But, Supreme Court’s precedent and common view of academia don’t admit a criminal ability of juridical person at present and don’t hold criminally liable for corporate when member of corporation committed beach of trust in the Criminal Act. But we need to punish not only direct actor but also corporate itself in order to prevent corporate crimes effectively. And we should also punish indirect actors(for example, dominant stockholder) that deciding corporate intention substantially or actually. So, in this paper, I will assert that we should admit a criminal ability to juridical person and juridical person is directly criminally liable for beach crime of trust of corporation’s member. And I will study on substance of criminal liability of an direct actor (for example, president, director or employee etc.) and corporate as actor in the corporate crime, especially beach crime of trust of Criminal Act.