[2] The meaning and requirements of "a group aimed at committing a crime" under Article 114 of the Criminal Code

[3] In a case where Defendant A was indicted on charges of organizing and operating an external office, etc. for the purpose of deceiving victims to illegally sell used vehicles by deceptioning them, and the remaining Defendants except Defendant A and B were indicted of joining and engaging in activities for a criminal group, the case holding that the above external office constitutes a group with a system that repeatedly conducts fraud by acting on the part of the members, such as the representative, team leader, dispatch assistance, and telephone counselor, under the joint purpose that a certain number of persons commit fraud, the above external office constitutes a group with the aim of committing a crime under Article 114 of the Criminal Act, namely, a group with the aim of committing a crime

[2] “A group aimed at committing a crime” under Article 114 of the Criminal Act refers to a group of groups with an organizational system with which a certain number of people can repeatedly commit a crime by acting in accordance with the division of roles set by the members under the common purpose of which they conduct a crime with death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment of not less than four years. Although it is not necessary to establish a “minimum system of command” required by a “criminal group,” it shall have an organizational structure to facilitate the planning and execution of a crime.

[3] 피고인 갑은 무등록 중고차 매매상사(이하 ‘외부사무실’이라 한다)를 운영하면서 피해자들을 기망하여 중고차량을 불법으로 판매해 금원을 편취할 목적으로 외부사무실 등에서 범죄집단을 조직·활동하고, 피고인 갑, 을을 제외한 나머지 피고인들은 범죄집단에 가입·활동하였다는 내용으로 기소된 사안에서, 외부사무실에는 회사 조직과 유사하게 대표, 팀장, 팀원(출동조, 전화상담원)으로 직책이나 역할이 분담되어 있었는데, 상담원은 인터넷 허위 광고를 보고 전화를 건 손님들에게 거짓말로 외부사무실에 방문할 것을 유인하는 역할을, 출동조는 외부사무실을 방문한 손님들에게 허위 중고차량을 보여주면서 소위 ‘뜯플’ 또는 ‘쌩플’의 수법으로 중고차량 매매계약을 유도하는 역할을, 팀장은 소속 직원을 채용하고, 손님 방문 시 출동조를 배정하며, 출동조로부터 계약 진행 상황을 보고받고, 출동조가 매매계약 유도를 성공하면 손님들과 정식 계약을 체결하는 역할을, 대표인 피고인 갑은 사무실과 집기, 중고자동차 매매계약에 필요한 자료와 할부금융, 광고 등을 준비해 외부사무실을 운영하면서 팀장을 채용한 뒤 팀장으로 하여금 팀을 꾸려 사기범행을 실행하도록 하고, 할부금융사로부터 할부중개수수료를 받으면 이를 팀별로 배분하는 역할을 수행하였으며, 대표 또는 팀장은 팀장, 출동조, 전화상담원에게 고객을 유인하고 대응하는 법이나 기망하는 방법 등에 대해 교육한 점, 대표는 팀장들이 이용할 할부금융사 및 광고 사이트를 정해 팀장들에게 알려주고 팀장들로부터 상사입금비 및 광고비를 받는 한편, 손님들이 중고차량을 할부로 계약한 경우 할부금융사로부터 받는 할부중개수수료 중 절반을 팀장들에게 나누어 주었으며, 팀장들은 대표로부터 지급받은 위 할부중개수수료와 중고차량 매매에 따른 차익을 출동조 및 상담원에게 각각 나눠주고 나머지를 가져간 점, 피고인 을을 제외한 나머지 피고인들은 외부사무실 업무와 관련하여 ‘텔레그램’을 이용한 대화방을 여러 개 개설하여 정보를 공유하거나 각종 보고 등을 하였고, 대표와 팀장들은 월 1~2회 회의를 하면서 단속정보 등을 공유하였으며, 팀장들은 공유된 정보를 소속 출동조 및 상담원에게 전파한 점 등을 종합하면, 외부사무실은 특정 다수인이 사기범행을 수행한다는 공동목적 아래 구성원들이 대표, 팀장, 출동조, 전화상담원 등 정해진 역할분담에 따라 행동함으로써 사기범행을 반복적으로 실행하는 체계를 갖춘 결합체, 즉 형법 제114조 의 ‘범죄를 목적으로 하는 집단’에 해당한다는 이유로, 이와 달리 보아 공소사실을 무죄로 판단한 원심판결에 법리오해의 위법이 있다고 한 사례.

1. Judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor

A. As to the primary facts charged regarding the organization, joining, and activities of a criminal organization

“Organization aimed at committing a crime” as prescribed by Article 114 of the Criminal Act means a continuous combination with several persons with a common purpose, which constitutes a specific crime, and has a minimum leading system that leads the organization or maintains internal order (Supreme Court Decision 2016Do1221 Decided May 12, 2016).

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court acquitted Defendant 1 on all of the charges, on the ground that there was no proof of a crime regarding the joining of a criminal organization and the part concerning the activities of a criminal organization among the charges against the remaining Defendants, except for Defendant 1, Defendant 1, and Defendant 22.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the record, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “criminal organization” under Article 114 of the Criminal Act.

B. As to the ancillary charges concerning the organization, joining, and activities of a criminal group

1) “A group aimed at committing a crime” under Article 114 of the Criminal Act refers to a group of groups with an organizational system with which a certain number of people can repeatedly commit a crime by acting in accordance with the division of roles set by the members under the common purpose of which they conduct a crime with death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment of not less than four years. Although it is not necessary to establish a “minimum system of command” required by a “criminal group,” it should have an organizational structure to facilitate the planning and implementation of a crime.

2) The summary of the conjunctive charge added in the lower court is that “Defendant 1 organized and operated a criminal group in an external office (hereinafter “the external office of this case”) located in Incheon ( Address omitted) from June 2016 to June 2017, and the remaining Defendants except Defendant 1 and Defendant 22 joined and participated in the criminal group.”

The lower court acquitted the Defendant on this ground as stated in its reasoning, on the ground that it is difficult to regard the external office of this case as a crime group equipped with a specific system or structure that constitutes an organization to the extent that it can be distinguished from the group and the group co-principal.

3) According to the facts admitted by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the following facts and circumstances are revealed.

가) 이 사건 외부사무실에는 직원이 20명에서 40명 정도 있었고, 그중 팀장은 3명에서 6명까지 있었다. 이 사건 외부사무실은 회사 조직과 유사하게 대표, 팀장, 팀원(출동조, 전화상담원)으로 직책이나 역할이 분담되어 있었는데, 상담원은 인터넷 허위 광고를 보고 전화를 건 손님들에게 거짓말로 이 사건 외부사무실에 방문할 것을 유인하는 역할을, 출동조는 이 사건 외부사무실을 방문한 손님들에게 허위 중고차량을 보여주면서 소위 ‘뜯플’ 또는 ‘쌩플’의 수법으로 중고차량 매매계약을 유도하는 역할을, 팀장은 소속 직원을 채용하고, 손님 방문 시 출동조를 배정하며, 출동조로부터 계약 진행 상황을 보고받고, 출동조가 매매계약 유도를 성공하면 손님들과 정식 계약을 체결하는 역할을, 대표인 피고인 1은 사무실과 집기, 중고자동차 매매계약에 필요한 자료와 할부금융, 광고 등을 준비해 이 사건 외부사무실을 운영하면서 팀장을 채용한 뒤 팀장으로 하여금 팀을 꾸려 이 사건 사기범행을 실행하도록 하고, 할부금융사로부터 할부중개수수료를 받으면 이를 팀별로 배분하는 역할을 수행하였다. 대표 또는 팀장은 팀장, 출동조, 전화상담원에게 고객을 유인하고 대응하는 법이나 기망하는 방법 등에 대해 교육하였다.

B) The representative determined the subsidiary director and the advertising site to be used by the team leader, and received commercial expenses and advertising expenses from the team leader. In addition, the representative divided half of the intermediary commission received from the installment financing company in the case of a contract with a large vehicle of customers, the representative divided them into the team leader. The team leader divided 20 to 30% of the intermediary commission received from the representative, and 5 to 10% of the intermediary commission received from the representative, and divided the dispatch team into 20 to 5 to 10% to the counselor, and brought the remainder.

C) The remaining Defendants, except Defendant 22, opened a toilet room using the “comtogram” in relation to the affairs of the instant external office and shared information or filed various reports, etc. In the entire channel where all employees including the representatives participate, matters such as enforcement, etc. are publicly notified, in the team room where the members of the team participate, the contents that the counselors enticed customers, and the vehicle and amount of the players, etc., in the private room where the team team members participate, the list of visitors, etc. were shared or reported by the counselors, and in the telephone report room in which the counselors participate, the number of visitors received calls with customers, etc. In addition, the representative and the team leader shared regulatory information, etc. at a meeting once or twice a month, and the team leader disseminated the shared information to the affiliated dispatch team and counselors.

D) The employees of the external office of this case were in an irregular manner a general meeting or a meeting of camping out, and all of the expenses incurred therein were borne by Defendant 1, the representative, Defendant 1. Defendant 1, in preparation for the case of crackdown, frequently moved the external office of this case. In this case, all of the employees of the external office of this case moved to a new office prepared by Defendant 1, and served the same as before.

마) 이 사건 외부사무실에서 이루어진 중고자동차 매매계약은 모두 소위 ‘뜯플’, ‘쌩플’ 등의 사기 수법이 동원된 것이고, 정상적인 판매행위는 이루어지지 않았다.

4) Examining these facts and circumstances in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the external office of this case constitutes “a group for criminal purposes” under Article 114 of the Criminal Act, i.e., a group with a system that repeatedly conducts fraud by acting on behalf of the members, such as the representative, team leader, mobilization assistance, and telephone counselor, with the common purpose that a certain number of persons conduct fraud.

Nevertheless, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court acquitted the instant external office of the Defendant on the charge that the external office does not constitute a criminal group under Article 114 of the Criminal Act. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “criminal group” under Article 114 of the Criminal Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Judgment on Defendant 22’s grounds of appeal

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court convicted Defendant 22 of the facts charged. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal doctrine and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, but did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on deception in fraud, causation, fraud aiding and abetting, and intent and number of crimes in perjury, and burden of proof, or by omitting judgment,

3. Scope of reversal

As seen earlier, the part of the judgment of the court below as to the acquittal of the remaining Defendants as to the conjunctive charges regarding the organization, joining, and activities of the group of crimes against Defendant 22 cannot be reversed. Accordingly, the part concerning the acquittal of the primary charges in relation to the same body should be reversed. Since the crime of fraud, etc. which the court below found guilty is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one sentence should be sentenced, the part concerning the remaining Defendants except Defendant 22 should be reversed in its entirety.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against the remaining Defendants except Defendant 22 is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. Defendant 22's appeal is dismissed. However, since the omission of the same description as the judgment of the court below is obvious that it is an error, it is corrected to add it. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Ki-taik (Presiding Justice)