206 Maz. 311 (Consolidation)

Cheongcheon-si, Cheongcheon-si

Permanent Office of Macheon-si Cultural Complex

2. Previous Balebry (52****** 1*******) and party members.

Cheongcheon-si, Cheongcheon-si

Permanent Office of Macheon-si Cultural Complex

Attorney Lee Do-young

In the event that the above fine is not paid by the defendant, the period of 50,000 won converted into one day shall be avoided.

In order to attract the old Bright to the old house, it is to attract it in the old house.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

It is ordered that the above fine should be paid in an amount equivalent to the above fine on the right before the defendant.

Between 200 and 2004, the Defendant was a person who served as the 16th member of the National Assembly; the Defendant’s spouse of the 16th member of the Blue House; and the Defendant’s leap○○, the Defendant’s leap○’s son’s son, who was in charge of the management of support money of the said supporters’ association at the time of around 2001.

1. Defendant 1, ○○, in collusion with someone else, shall:

A. On October 27, 2001, while keeping in business the accounts in the name of the Agricultural Cooperative Federation in the name of the National Assembly member’s “Support Association for All Members of the National Assembly”.

Embezzlement 50,000,000 won arbitrarily withdrawn and consumed for the private use of Defendant leap○○○; and

(b) A 37,00,000 won which was kept in the account in the name of the said supporters' association for business on the 30th of the same month;

Having arbitrarily remitted to the account in the name of the wife, and has consumed it for the use of leap’s business capital, and embezzled it;

다 . 같은 해 11 . 5 . 경 위 후원회 명의 계좌에 업무상 보관 중이던 6 , 000 , 000원을 임 의로 인출한 후 피고인 윤○○의 사적 용도로 사용하고 , 50 , 000 , 000원을 윤아이 운영 하던 회사인 주식회사 천안사람들 명의 계좌로 임의로 송금한 후 피고인 윤○○의 동 생인 윤★★의 사업자금 용도로 소비하여 , 합계 56 , 000 , 000원을 횡령하고 ,

D. 50,00,000 won, which was under business keeping in the account in the name of the supporters’ association on the 6th of the same month, was arbitrarily remitted to the account in the name of the said supporters’ association, and embezzled this by consuming it for the use of leap’s business fund;

(e) arbitrarily remitting KRW 10,00,000, which was under business keeping in the account in the name of the said supporters’ association on the 9th of the same month to the YellowB account, and embezzled it for the purpose of use, such as the purchase price of leap cards;

2. On November 22, 2001, the Defendants: (a) voluntarily withdrawn KRW 60,000,000, which was kept in the account in the name of the said supporters’ association, from around November 22, 2001; and (b) embezzled it using it as the price of art purchased under the joint name of the Defendants around the 23th day of the same month.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Protocol concerning the interrogation of the Defendants by the prosecution

1. A copy of the protocol concerning the examination of suspect by the prosecution against leapment;

1 . 윤★★ , 윤소 , 피고인 전●●에 대한 각 검찰진술조서

1 . 진▲▲에 대한 검찰진술조서 사본

1. Details of the support fund;

1. Investigative report (to attach details of deposits and withdrawals from the account of supporters' associations all the National Assembly members);

1. A certified copy of the register, a real estate sales contract;

1. A copy of the protocol of trial ( April 8, 2005);

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts;

Articles 356, 355(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act (Provided, That since the Defendants do not have any confidence of a custodian in the course of performing their duties, the Defendants are subject to punishment provided for in the proviso to Article 33 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act pursuant to Article 35(1) of the Criminal Act.

1. Concurrent crimes (Defendant leap ○○);

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Detention in a workhouse (to Before the defendant)

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution (Defendant leap○○);

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration to the restoration of leaps by way of making a temporary useful support payment immediately re-deposited, etc.)

1. An order of provisional payment (to be issued before the defendant)

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Judgment on the Defense Counsel's argument

With respect to the facts charged in the judgment of the Defendants, the current Political Fund Act provides a penal provision in cases where political funds are used for private expenses. However, at the time of the crime in this case, the ownership of support funds belongs to the National Assembly member concerned. Thus, the above facts constituting an offense are not committed. However, in full view of the purport of the provisions of the former Political Fund Act (amended by Act No. 6516 of September 27, 2001), which was applied at the time of the crime in this case, a supporters’ association is a separate organization that is distinct from a member of the National Assembly, and a member of the National Assembly can use support funds only through the process of receiving a contribution from a supporters’ association. Thus, the act of withdrawing and using support funds without going through such procedures shall be deemed to constitute an offense of occupational embezzlement.