beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.07.26 2018노556

특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)

Text

1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one and half years;

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

The gist of the prosecutor's appeal: misunderstanding the legal principles, the act of applying for the loan of this case, which submitted false bonds with the intent of acquiring all the loans, is a single act, and as long as the defendant was paid excessive loans exceeding the real amount even if some of the entire bonds with the advance payment, it shall be deemed that a crime of fraud is established against the entire loans paid by the victim bank.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below, which should be evaluated as a single act, excludes the defendant's act of applying for a loan from the amount obtained by acquiring the money equivalent to the ratio of the amount of the real prepaid loan, which is unlawful by misapprehending the legal principles on the calculation of

Judgment

The summary of this part of the facts charged was from August 2005 to May 2010, the Defendant operated an entertainment center in the name of “E” on the first floor and the first floor of the ground located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and operated in cooperation with F since 2008.

The Defendant and F, while operating the above “E”, did not meet the operating funds, received a loan of KRW 1 billion from the “Specialized Loans for Entertainment Establishments (hereinafter referred to as “Maaling Loans”) which provide credit documents as security to employees of entertainment establishments, such as entertainment loans, from the K Savings Bank through G, which is a hub for loan brokerage.”

The Defendant and F heard that in order for H Savings Bank loans to be made by a person in charge of H Savings Bank loans, they should submit documents on safe deposits equivalent to 150% of the loan amount as security, and prepare documents as if employees who did not receive advance payments and employees were mobilized and paid false advance payments, and have the intent to receive the H Savings Bank loans by deceiving the person in charge of H Savings Bank loans.

The defendant and the F shall be 27 employees at the business establishment above "E" around September 4, 2009.