Tuesday , April 7 2020
Home / slovakia / Italian entrepreneur Diego genus is justified: The Prosecutor of the & # 39; is the call

Italian entrepreneur Diego genus is justified: The Prosecutor of the & # 39; is the call


According to the prosecutor Diego R. as a statutory body, the managing director of one of his companies in November 2016, despite the rejection of the sale and purchase agreement entered into with sub & # 39; subject to the sale of property of Presov, the possession and continue to use the agricultural tractor in January 2017. He noted that the engine was the company introduced the defendant for use even in April 2015 in time for him, but the purchase price is not paid 217.200 euros. Tractor other words, it came back and prevent its adoption after graduation, so that their actions caused damage 159.812 euros. "Thus, it becomes an external thing entrusted to him, causing damage to property in the foreign large-scale" He went to the public prosecutor so that their actions have made a very serious & # 39; oznae crime of embezzlement.

According to the chairman of the Senate, he should carry out fraud elements of the crime of unlawful appropriation of another's wort matter that was previously assigned to the offender in accordance with the contract or the law. The procedure was as shown below, have shown that the defendant companies in the sale of the company was trading for many years. "Apparently, as a result of this positive experience, the seller gave tractor company accused without payment." He explained that he was selling the company caused a lack of clarity in contractual relations, related, followed by a tractor.

He noted that in addition to the purchase and sale agreement was entered into a lease for a fixed term, namely, eight months and four days. "If the lessee uses the thing even after the agreed term of the lease and the landlord against it does not submit an application for the case to the court within 30 days after the end of the lease term, restores a lease on the same terms under which it was originally agreed upon." He said the judge. In this particular case to do so in other words it was not until April 2017, so that he could not talk about the illegal possession of defendants tractor. "We came to the conclusion that it was done, it is not, as stated in the indictment, but not a crime" he added. The representatives of the victim for another hearing in March that he could not apply any harm.

As for the second charge, businessman prosecutor in 2015 and 2016, provided as a manager of one of his companies more nezdokladovaných remittances marked as loans between related parties. Do you have some of these financial transfers after recognized due to the defendant company. He should go to the three companies and the total amount of more than 1,630,000 euros. The prosecutor has also continued as a partner and managing director of the respective company sold a 25 percent stake in another company of his daughter disturbed estimated. According to him, a more distant part of the assets of the company concerned and cause its decline and destruction, because it corresponds to one of the creditors of Ziar nad Hronom, at least 100,700 euros.

"It has been shown, and notified the administrator about the restructuring and expert opinion that the reduction of the accused was not due to the conduct referred to the public prosecutor in his indictment." said the President of the Chamber, the prosecutor asked the defendant guilty for resale 25 percent stake in the broken prices, without giving a single example. the degree of undercutting.

Redevelopment administrator judges testimony also stressed that the main reason for the decline is considered to be a high level of acquisition of new investments and the credit company of gravity, as well as justifying managerial responsibilities in the establishment of obligations in relation to the actual definition of the return on a major investment even in the face, he could not foresee. According to accused, as it were. Failures subsidies for cattle and land disposal. "Criminal liability is not enough that the debtor delays satisfaction of the creditor, if he is able to satisfy the demand of the other assets of the debtor" said the judge.

Source link