Violation of law

2018 Highest 3526 (Joints)

2018 Of note 3900 (Joints)

2019 Highest 287 (Joints)

2019 Highest 1194 (Joints)

2019 Highest 2057 (Joints)

2019 Highest 3763 (Joints)

2019 Highest 4277(Joints)

20 Highest 1601(Joints)

200 Of c. 3901(combined)

Residence

Reference domicile

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecution against the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act is dismissed.

"2018 Highest 2867"

The defendant is the representative of the planning real estate company (State)C.

Around July 2017, the Defendant entered into a contract to purchase the said real estate in KRW 1.2 billion with the owner of the forest land in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, with the intention to sell the said real estate from the owner of the said forest land, and did not directly verify the fact of delegation to the owner. Moreover, the Defendant, without preparing the contract, remitted only the down payment of KRW 1.2 million to the account designated by the said E, and the Defendant entered into a contract to purchase the D Forest in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, U.S. around October 20, 2017 and made a contract to purchase KRW 1.79 billion for the purchase of the down payment and paid only the down payment of KRW 170 million due to financial difficulties, thereby having no capacity to sell the said D forest and fields to others.

1. Crimes against victim doorF;

A. Around September 8, 2017, in the Nam-gu planning real estate office of Ulsan-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government, there is development gains if the victim’s doorF purchased 1,320 square meters of the Ulsan-gunD. The said forest is a forest that can be developed with the forest purchased by the (ju)C, and all matters related thereto are responsible for by the company.

However, even though the above D forest land was paid the down payment under the name of the above company, it was not true that it was in contact with the owner and confirmed, and it was not possible to transfer its ownership to the above forest land because there was no fact that the contract was made. The above forest land has an average gradient of at least 17 degrees as it was impossible to develop it.

Nevertheless, by deceiving the victim as such, the Defendant received each transfer of KRW 138,180,00 on September 8, 2017, KRW 16,060,000, and KRW 92,120,00 on September 16, 2017, and KRW 138,180,000 on September 14, 200.

B. On December 5, 2017, when the above company office was unable to perform the above D Forest contract, the victim made a false statement to the effect that “the victim would pay the company’s miscellaneous land as it is better for the company’s ownership and pay it on behalf of the company, and the company will build a road of 8 meters wide in the above forest land. However, as I land has a higher unit price than D land, it would demand the company to pay more money equivalent to the difference.”

However, the above I Forest land did not have the ability to transfer its ownership even if the Defendant did not have the ability to pay the remainder of the forest land under the name of the above company, and even if he received the payment from the victim, it was practically impossible to develop the forest land, such as opening a road with an average gradient of at least 17 degrees as a preserved mountainous district area, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 3,00,000,000 won from the above G bank account in the name of the above company on the same day, and acquired 53,000,000 won in total from each of the above 12.6.50,000 won on the next day.

2. Crimes against the knife of the victim;

On November 7, 2017, the Seoul-gu planning real estate office of Ulsan-gu (State) concluded that the victim Damage K purchased 33 square meters from D's land, and that the above forest land is a forest land that can be developed with the forest purchased by the C, and all matters related thereto shall be responsible for the company.

However, even though the above D forest land was paid the down payment under the name of the above company, it was not true that it was in contact with the owner and confirmed, and it was not possible to transfer its ownership to the above forest land because there was no fact that the contract was made. The above forest land has an average gradient of at least 17 degrees as it was impossible to develop it.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received 4,635,00 won from the G bank account (H) in the name of the said company on the same day.

3. Crimes against the sexual harassment of a victim;

On January 19, 2018, the Seoul-gu Planning Real Estate Office of Ulsan-gu (State) concluded that "the purchase of a root of 331m in D is a development profit if you purchase a root of 331m in D, and the said forest land is a forest land that can be developed as a forest purchased by the C and is responsible for and will be opened and opened 8 meters in the above forest land. All of the relevant matters are responsible for the company."

However, even if the above D forest did not have the ability to pay the remainder after only paying the down payment under the name of the above company, it did not have the ability to transfer its ownership, and the above forest land was de facto impossible to develop, such as opening a road with an average gradient of at least 17 degrees as an area preserved for preserved mountainous district and at least 8 meters.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received each transfer of KRW 5,000,000 from the G bank account (H) in the name of the said company on the same day, and acquired KRW 68,000,000 on January 24, 2018 by deceiving the victim.

"2018 Highest 3526"

On December 2, 2017, the Defendant, as the representative of C Co., Ltd. for planning and real estate development business in Ulsan Nam-gu, made a false statement that he would make a transfer registration at the time of paying the balance if he purchases 20 square meters out of the N land to the victim Park M in the above office for the first time, and then prepared a sales contract with the seller C and the victim as the buyer.

However, in fact, the defendant or the defendant was not the owner of the above N, and the owner of the above real estate was not allowed to enter into a contract to purchase the above real estate from the PE that the owner of the above real estate was entrusted, and did not confirm the fact of delegation to the owner, and did not prepare the contract. Although paying the down payment to PE, the defendant did not have any means to pay the balance, and the defendant did not have any means to pay the balance. The defendant was in excess of his/her obligation due to bad credit standing, and even if he/she received the purchase payment from the victim, C did not have any intent or ability to transfer the ownership registration to the owner by delivering the purchase payment to the owner.

Nevertheless, as above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received from the victim the amount of KRW 3 million on or around the 6th day of the same month as the purchase price, and received KRW 7.8 million on or around the 20th day of the same month from the victim, and acquired the amount of KRW 10.78 million on or around the 10.78 million from the

"2018 Highest 3900"

On August 30, 2017, the Defendant stated that “The land of this case” 122 square meters (hereinafter “the land of this case”) among D to PP is the land on which the victim’s PP can stand. If the land is purchased at KRW 57,430,00,00, the Defendant would be responsible by C for the transfer of registration, and would allow PP to lay down the entire house.”

However, in fact, the instant land is a preserved mountainous district, and its average gradient is no less than 17∑, and the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the intent to sell the instant land only when the horses of the E claiming that he was delegated to the said owner without confirming the intent to sell the instant land, and it was unclear whether the ownership of the instant land can be transferred because it was not prepared in a sales contract, and even if the contract on domestic ownership was normal, even if the contract on domestic ownership was entered into a normal state, the Defendant is in bad credit standing. Since from around 2016, C did not have the ability to pay the balance of the purchase and sale of the instant land from around 2016, even if it was paid from the victim, there was no intention or ability to transfer the purchase price to the owner by delivering it to the owner.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 5,743,00 from the victim to the bank account in the name of C, around September 18, 2017.

"2019 Highest 287"

The defendant is the representative of the planning real estate company (State)C.

On July 20, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement that “If the Defendant purchased 1,167 square meters from D’s land from the planning real estate office in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-gu, and the Victim Kim Q, the Defendant would have development gains. The said forest land is a forest land purchased by the (ju)C, and all matters pertaining thereto should be responsible for the company.”

However, in fact, the Defendant paid the down payment under the name of the said Company to the E to whom the owner was delegated the sale of the said D Forest. However, the Defendant did not have any verification of the fact that the said forest was in direct contact with the actual owner and no fact was prepared, and thus did not have the capacity to transfer the said forest ownership to another person. The said forest was virtually impossible to develop because the average gradient of the forest as preserved mountainous district exceeds 17 degrees.

On July 24, 2017, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 30,000,000 won from the bank account (R) in the name of the said company from the victim, and acquired the total amount of KRW 128,502,80 through nine times during the period from around that time to November 2, 2017, as shown in the attached crime list.

[2019 Highest 1194]

The defendant is the representative of C corporation with the purpose of planning real estate development business located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu.

Around August 2017, the Defendant, at the above company office, made a false statement that “S, the head of the above company, “S, U.S. D (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) is a land on which the ownership can be secured by the company and the construction is in progress with the permission for development. In the case of KRW 470,000,000, the Defendant would make the registration of the transfer of ownership at the disposal of the land at the disposal of the company and divide the land after the completion of the civil engineering work, thereby making the registration of the division of the land.”

However, the instant land is a preserved mountainous district, and the average gradient is no less than 17∑, and the Defendant did not confirm the intent to sell the instant land to the owner, and the Defendant concluded a sales contract with trust and trusting only the horses of the E claiming that he was entrusted to the owner of the instant land, and the ownership of the instant land was transferred to the owner of the instant land. Although the Defendant did not prepare a contract and paid a down payment to the E, the Defendant was in a bad credit standing situation at the time, but the Defendant did not have any means to pay the balance in capital stock from around 2016. Even if the Defendant received the purchase payment from the victim, it was thought that he would use it as salary or food expenses to the employees of C, and did not have any intent or ability to transfer the ownership registration to the owner by delivering the purchase payment to the owner.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim as above, received 23,030,000 won from the bank account (U) in the name of Lee Bank Co., Ltd. around September 18, 2017 as the purchase price for 150 square meters among the instant land from the victim and acquired 27,060,000 won in total from the same account on September 21, 2017, and 27,060,000 won in the same account on September 26, 2017.

"2019 Highest 2057"

1. Fraud against the victim’s interest;

On June 12, 2017, the Defendant entered into a real estate sale contract for 82 square meters out of the above forests and fields, with the victim Lee S, in the office of the said company located on the W of the building in Ulsan-gu V building in Ulsan-gu, Seoul-si. The Defendant: “I would like to transfer the registration of ownership transfer within one month when purchasing the land.”

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with the owner of the above land to purchase the above land 1.56 billion won, and was not the owner of the above land, and was in bad credit standing. Since 2016, C did not have any means to pay the above sales price. Even if it was paid the purchase price from the victim, it was thought that it would have been used as wages or food expenses to the employees of C, and did not have any intent or ability to make the registration of ownership transfer to the victim normally by delivering the purchase price to the owner.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received 3 million won from the victim, through a bank account (Y) in the name of C Co., Ltd. on June 12, 2017, and acquired 30,075,000 won in total, and 33,075,000 won in the same account on June 14, 2017.

2. Fraud against B or B of the victim.

On July 7, 2017, the Defendant entered into a real estate sale contract for the forest land in question with the victim's high interest at the location described in paragraph (1) of the same Article, stating that "It is highly worth making investment because X forest land can be developed in the future. It can be seen that market profit can be seen within a short period. It is difficult to see that it will be transferred to the registration of ownership transfer within one month when purchasing the land."

However, at the time of fact, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with the owner of the above land to purchase KRW 1.50 million and the above land was not the owner of the above land, and was in bad credit standing. Since 2016, C did not have any means to pay the above sales price. Even if it was paid the purchase price from the victim, it was thought that it would be used as wages or food expenses to the employees of C, and did not have any intent or ability to pay the registration of ownership transfer to the victim normally by delivering the purchase price to the owner.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained 3 million won from the bank account (Y) in the name of C Co., Ltd. on July 7, 2017, and acquired 194,100,000 won with the same account on July 18, 2017, and acquired 197,100,000 won in total from the victim.

"2019 Highest 3763"

The defendant is the representative of the building AA of Ulsan-gu and the AC real estate in the AB of Ulsan-gu, and is engaged in the manufacturing industry with four full-time workers.

When a worker dies or retires, an employer shall pay the wages, compensations, retirement allowances, and other money or valuables within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred: Provided, That the period may, under special circumstances, be extended by mutual agreement between the parties concerned.

Nevertheless, the Defendant worked for the said company from November 1, 2018 to March 5, 2019, and did not pay KRW 3,100,000 of the wages of the retired AD within 14 days from the date of retirement without an agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

"2019 Highest 4277"

The defendant is the representative of C Co., Ltd. who is a real estate planning company.

On August 8, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim Kimg-gun D (hereinafter “instant land”) at the Ulsan AF floor of the company located in Ulsan-gu AE Building, Ulsan-gu, U.S. AF floor, stating that “The ownership of the company was secured and the construction is in progress with the permission for development. When purchasing the land in the amount of KRW 470,00,000, the Defendant would prejudice the registration of transfer of ownership and to divide the land after the completion of the civil engineering works.”

However, in fact, the instant land is a preserved mountainous district, and its average gradient is no longer than 17∑s, and the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the intent to sell the instant land in trust and with the statement of the PE claiming that he was delegated sale, and did not prepare a contract, and did not secure the ownership of the instant land. The Defendant did not have any means to pay the balance of KRW 1,00,000,000 for the instant land as capital erosion from around 2016, and even if the purchase price was paid from the victim, it was thought to be used as wages, food expenses, etc. of the employees belonging to C, and it did not have any intent or ability to normally make the transfer registration of ownership to the victim using the instant land as the purchase price.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received the total amount of KRW 23,030,00 from the victim to the bank account (Y) in the name of C Co., Ltd. on August 29, 2017, and received KRW 11,515,000 in the same account on October 21, 2017, and KRW 10,515,000 in the same account on October 27, 2017, respectively.

"200 Highest 1601"

The defendant is a person who operates a planning real estate company in the name of "AC of a stock company" on the Alst floor of Ulsan-gu AH building in Ulsan-gu.

1. Fraud against the victim ParkJ;

At the above AC office around June 15, 2018, the Defendant introduced the said AC office to the GaJ on “AK’s employees of the said company,” and made a false statement to the effect that “If the two Koreas are unified, the said company would be able to pay a little amount of money to the lower amount. It will be a tourist destination due to the development into the Republic of Korea, and GTX (Seoul metropolitan rapid railway), 4 to 5 times, and when purchasing 100 square meters out of the said land, the Defendant would transfer the registration within three months.”

However, in fact, around July 23, 2018, the Defendant concluded a contract to purchase 7 parcels of land, including the above land and the six parcels of adjacent land, with the purchase price of KRW 2 billion from the owner, and paid the down payment of KRW 200 million in the remainder of KRW 1.8 billion, but there was no specific plan to provide funds for the remainder of KRW 1.8 billion, and therefore, the Defendant or AC did not have any intent or ability to transfer ownership even if receiving money from the victim.

Around June 27, 2018, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 1 million from the victim to the AL bank account under the name of AC, as the down payment, and received a copy of the check equivalent to KRW 6 million as the balance on July 4, 2018.

2. Fraud against NAM;

On July 13, 2018, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “If he/she purchases 100 square meters out of GangseowonN, he/she will complete the registration of ownership transfer by October 11, 2018” with the victim’s employees EAL at the above AC office.

However, in fact, around July 23, 2018, the Defendant concluded a contract to purchase 7 parcels of land, including the above land and the six parcels of adjacent land, with the purchase price of KRW 2 billion from the owner, and paid the down payment of KRW 200 million in the remainder of KRW 1.8 billion, but there was no specific plan to provide funds for the remainder of KRW 1.8 billion, and therefore, the Defendant or AC did not have any intent or ability to transfer ownership even if receiving money from the victim.

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 9 million from the victim as the land price in July 16, 2018, from the victim, to the AL bank account in the name of AC, a corporation.

"200 Highest 3901"

The defendant is the representative director of C, a planning real estate company.

On October 28, 2017, the Defendant made a false statement to the above company's office located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, the employees of the above company, through LeeO and the jurisdictionAP, stating that "The U.S. AR land in Ulsan-si, Seoul-si, has a large number of government offices and companies in the surrounding areas, and there is also road, and there is a high prospect for investment in real estate in Ulsan-si, the highest land would be good if it will have a house."

However, in fact, the above land is most preserved mountainous districts for forestry use, which are preserved mountainous districts, and the average slope level of at least 17 degrees, and thus, it was impossible to construct housing as it is impossible to engage in development activities under relevant laws.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received from the victim a total of KRW 10 million as the down payment on the 28th day of the same month, and KRW 160 million as the remainder on the 30th day of the same month, including KRW 150 million, and KRW 17 million as the remainder on the 30th day of the same month, in C’s bank account (Y).

Summary of Evidence

(Omission)

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (Fraud) and Articles 109(1) and 36 of the Labor Standards Act (the fact that money and other valuables are not liquidated and the choice of imprisonment, respectively.)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Judgment on the issues of the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the act of deception and intentional fraud)

1. Deciding intent and ability to transfer land ownership;

According to the evidence duly adopted by the court, ① the Defendant entered into a sales contract on each land subject to sale recorded in the facts constituting the crime, and did not acquire full ownership due to the payment of intermediate payments and remainder, ② the Defendant sold part of each land to the victims of the instant case. ② The Defendant did not have the ability to procure the balance of the purchase and sale of the land purchased by the Defendant using a reliable financial institution loan based on the asset owned by the Defendant or the feasibility development plan, and the Defendant paid a considerable amount of compensation to the purchaser of the said land and introduced the purchaser to purchase the land again, and the Defendant did not have the ability to acquire full ownership by paying the balance of the said land except for the purchase and sale of the land to be received from an unspecified number of buyers who were engaged in the said company. ③ The Defendant paid a total of KRW 30 million to the employees of 200,000,000,000 to KRW 50,000,000,000,000 from KRW 3.5 billion,000,000.

According to the above facts, the defendant was unable to continuously cope with the employee's benefits and allowances up to KRW 100 million annual in a normal way unless special circumstances exist, such as: (a) he sells all the land purchased by C to many buyers at a price equal to the number of the purchase price within a prompt time; (b) by discovering new planned real estate and continuously soliciting the purchase price; and (c) continuously collecting the purchase price in excess of the purchase price; and (d) he was unable to continuously cope with the employee's benefits and allowances up to KRW 100 million annual in a normal manner. In addition, even though the defendant received the purchase price from a large number of land buyers in excess of the purchase price of the land he purchased from C, he paid them as wages, allowances, corporate operating expenses, etc., and did not pay any balance of the purchased land. In full view of this, the defendant could sufficiently be recognized that he was unaware of victims as if he did not have any problem with the acquisition of ownership even though he had no intent to transfer the ownership of the land sold to the victims normally; and (b) the intent of fraud is recognized.

2. Deciding the possibility of development, etc.;

According to the above evidence, the following facts are revealed: (a) the Defendant sold land D and AR in the form of an electric source housing complex where a divided road was opened on a level of 100 to 400 square meters; (b) the Defendant, either directly or through the Defendant’s employees, provided explanation to the victims that road construction and housing construction is possible and market increase is anticipated; (c) development activities, such as changes in the form and quality, are allowed only when the average slope level is less than 17 degrees pursuant to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes; (c) the average slope level of the above land exceeds that of road construction and housing construction, etc.; (d) the Defendant asserted that the above part of the land with a low gradient was able to confirm the above part; (c) the Defendant did not use a detailed gradient measurement for confirming the above part; and (d) the Defendant did not sell only the part that could have been actually constructed due to the low gradient to the purchaser of the land at a price that was purchased only to the agricultural and forestry business operator, and (d) the Defendant’s purchase price of the above land was not limited to 5 times.

According to the above facts, the defendant made a false statement to the victims about the possibility of the development of the above land, and it can be sufficiently recognized that there was an intention to commit fraud.

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of recommended sentences according to sentencing guidelines for fraudulent offenses;

[Determination of Punishment] 02. Systemal Fraud [Type 3] 50 million won or more, and less than five billion won.

[Special Aggravation] An aggravated element: A case where a person led or led to the commission of a fraud, or where the person committed a crime against unspecified or multiple victims for a considerable period of time.

[Recommendation Area and Scope of Recommendations] Special Priority Area, 4 years to 13 years from 13 years to 13 years (the addition of the same parallel parallels to 1/3 of the lowest sentence scope due to the increase in the first step as a result of the addition of the two parallels)

2. Determination of sentence;

The Defendant, while operating a typical real estate business entity, promoted speculation, made it difficult for many unspecified victims to receive a minimum probability of development, and sold land that did not have been acquired prior ownership by the Defendant. As a result, the total amount of damages to the 13 victims of the instant fraud totaled KRW 956,522,800, and KRW 3,100,000 due to non-payment of wages. The degree of deception and fraud are strong, and there is no intention to commit fraud compared to fraud by mere negligence. The Defendant paid some amount of money or transferred other property rights to the victims, thereby not securing a minimum possibility of development against the unspecified number of victims, and the Defendant sold the land that did not obtain a full ownership. The Defendant continued to pay the victim 10,000,000 won to the victims of the instant fraud, including the amount of money before and after payment of the same amount of money to the victims, but the Defendant did not receive a considerable amount of money before and after payment of the victim 10,000,000 won.

Public Prosecution Rejection Parts

1. Facts charged;

The defendant is the representative of AC on the 211 and 5th, Nam-gu, Ulsan-ro, Ulsan-ro, who is engaged in the manufacturing industry by using four full-time workers.

When a worker dies or retires, an employer shall pay the wages, compensations, retirement allowances, and other money or valuables within fourteen days after the cause for such payment occurred: Provided, That the period may, under special circumstances, be extended by mutual agreement between the parties concerned.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from June 7, 2017 to October 14, 2018, did not pay the wages of ParkB, 4,000,000, retirement allowances of 2,621,187, respectively, within 14 days from the date of retirement, without any agreement between the parties on the extension of the due date.

2. Determination

A. The instant case shall not be prosecuted against the clearly expressed will of the victimized worker (Article 109(2) of the Labor Standards Act and the proviso of Article 44 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act).

B. After the instant indictment, on July 21, 2020, the victimized workers expressed their intent not to be punished against the Defendant.

(c) Judgment dismissing public prosecution: Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act;

Attached Form: Omitted