결혼중개업의관리에관한법률위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. Although a person wishing to engage in international marriage brokerage business in the facts charged of the instant case is registered with the head of the competent Si/Gun/Gu in accordance with the relevant statutes, the Defendant, without the aforementioned registration, posted a notice to the effect that he/she arranged international marriage on the Internet 2C website (hereinafter “C”), provided consultation on D and international marriage with the Defendant reported and contacted with the Defendant on February 5, 2012. On February 5, 2012, the Defendant entered into an international marriage brokerage contract with the said D and hereinafter “international marriage brokerage with Vietnam on condition that he/she would receive a total amount of KRW 8.9 million” with the said D and the said “international marriage brokerage contract with Vietnam on condition that he/she would receive a total of KRW 8.9 million.”
7. Around February 14, 2012, the said D left Vietnam along with one another, arrange approximately 30 women in Vietnam, who are incompetuated in imprecing with each other, from the date of departure from Vietnam, and performed the international marriage brokerage business by arranging for the contact with Vietnam women F and undergoing the marriage procedure in accordance with the aforementioned method.
2. In short, in a criminal trial, the conviction should be based on evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof is insufficient to such a degree that it would lead to such conviction, the determination should be based on the defendant’s benefit even if there is a suspicion of guilt.
(Supreme Court Decision 201Do15767 Decided February 13, 2014 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do15767, Feb. 13, 201). There is a written statement of the police against D on the purport that at the time of direct evidence as shown in the above facts charged, the Defendant prepared an international marriage contract with the Defendant and paid 8.9 million won in cash to the Defendant as a broker fee. The evidence supporting this lies on D and Vietnam women’s pictures taken by the Defendant on their side and on the screen of the marriage broker’s homepage currently operated