Final answer:
A breach of the duty of loyalty by a corporate officer is exemplified by self-dealing, where the officer's personal interests conflict with that of the corporation. Methods of voting like straight or cumulative voting do not constitute a breach. Piercing the corporate veil pertains more to the duty of care rather than loyalty.
Step-by-step explanation:
When considering the actions of a corporate officer, a breach of the duty of loyalty occurs when an individual puts their personal interests above those of the corporation. Of the options listed, self-dealing is a direct breach of the duty of loyalty. Self-dealing occurs when an officer engages in business transactions on behalf of the corporation that benefits themselves personally, often at the expense of the corporation. This can include awarding contracts to themselves or their family members, or using corporate assets for personal gain.
Straight voting and cumulative voting are methods used in shareholder voting to elect directors and are not considered breaches of duty. Piercing the corporate veil refers to a legal decision to treat the rights or liabilities of a corporation as the rights or liabilities of its shareholders or directors and typically pertains to the duty of care, not loyalty.
To illustrate with an example from corporate crime, embezzlement would be a scenario where a breach of duty, including the duty of loyalty, occurs since it involves misappropriating funds from the corporation for personal use.