Anti-Fraud, Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents

[2013Gohap971]

The defendant is a person who has operated E (hereinafter referred to as E) a 'D' producer company in Yongcheon-si, Youngcheon-si.

On August 8, 2011, the Defendant solicited the victims F and G to the effect that “D, free of charge, shall be provided to the victims F and G, the husband and wife of Mongolia, to the effect that “D, free of charge, shall be provided to approximately KRW 15 billion, in the future, at the time of Ulsanist Republic of Korea, at approximately 60 million, at approximately KRW 15 billion.” From August 201 to November 201, the Defendant solicited the victims to make an investment in KRW 1.2 billion. On January 201, 201, the Defendant made an oral agreement with the victims to provide D, free of charge, with the victims F and G public officials of Mongolia, etc., and the victims of Mongolia, who signed the agreement with the victims of Mongolia, at the time of Mongolianist Republic of China, at the time of Mongolian, with H, etc., on April 27, 2012.

On February 2, 2012, the defendant, at the office of the victims in the fifth floor of Songpa-gu Seoul International Building, the fact was that the defendant operated E and received money from the victims for the purpose of paying off the defendant's debt, etc., even if he received money from the victims for the purpose of using D free execution of D, it was not a flag to be used for such purpose, but a flag for the purpose of paying the defendant's debt, etc., but it is necessary for the victims to purchase materials to construct D in the first 150 knife as agreed with the Ulsanististan City, and it was acquired from the victims on March 6, 2012.

[2013Gohap112]

On August 21, 2013, the Defendant is a person engaging in driving of JM7 car, and around 14:00 on August 21, 2013, the Defendant suffered from the Defendant’s front panion part of the L Drivers’ LV (33 years old) driving car running at a speed of about 40 kilometers in Si/Gu-Si/Gu-si, in the vicinity of Si/Gu-si, through the Cheongcheon-si, the Cheongcheon-si, the Cheongcheon-si, the Cheongcheon-si, which was running at a speed of about 40 kilometers in Si/Gu-si, while driving at a speed of about 30 kilometers in Si/Gu-si.

Summary of Evidence

[2013Gohap971]

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F, G and M;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the accused;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning the F;

1. Each police statement on N,O, P, and Q;

1. Each statement of R, S, Q, T, U,V, W, and X;

1. A. The copy of the receipt of the material submitted by the informant (related to KRW 700 million), a copy of the check submitted by the informant, a copy of the investment agreement submitted by the informant, a certificate of stock transfer submitted by the informant, a copy of the understanding of the material submitted by the informant, a copy of the business contract submitted by the informant, a copy of the mining contract submitted, a copy of the material submitted by the informant, a copy of the mining records records of the informant, a record of the material submitted, a record of the material submitted, a statement of the performance of the material submitted, a document submitted, a statement of account transaction - a report of internal investigation (the results of the confirmation of the person who has responded to the work), a report of investigation (the results of the account tracking), a report of account analysis (the results of the analysis of the consent of the account and the detection of another corporation in the operation of A.) in the past, a copy of the check, a copy of the investigative report (WAB), a statement of the foreigner, a false statement of suspect, a suspect, a suspect, a suspect, a suspect, a summary report of investigation report or a statement.

AI, AJ telephone conversations), confirmation document, copy of passbook, receipt, plan for construction of GER Hous Housing, electric sign, undertaking, plan for construction of Mongolia UBC in the first year, investigation report (verification of the contents of investigation by the investigation authorities of Mongolia), order for inspection by the public prosecutor's office in Ulsanan City, Ulsanan City public prosecutor's office, copy of the public prosecutor's office in Ulsanan City, request for cooperation in investigation (request for inquiry of immigration system)

[2013Gohap112]

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. When the police statements to AK are made;

1. The actual condition survey report and the investigation report (to be attached to the victim's K diagnosis report and the repair estimate);

Application of Statutes

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

Article 3(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (Fraud), Article 3(1) and proviso of Article 3(2)2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act (the occupation of injury by occupational negligence, and

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, (2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act shall be more severe in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (the aggravated punishment of the above two crimes shall be added up to the sum of the long-term punishment

Judgment on the argument of the defendant and defense counsel

1. Summary of the assertion

On March 3, 2012, the Defendant received KRW 700 million from the victims and agreed to be a political fund in Mongolia, and accordingly, the Defendant withdrawn the total amount of KRW 700 million deposited in the account in Mongolia operated by the Defendant and executed it as a political fund on March 7, 2012, so the Defendant’s deception did not exist.

2. Determination

(a) Use of the above money at the time when the victims deposit KRW 70 million;

First of all, it is examined whether the reason why the victims deposited KRW 700 million into the E account operated by the defendant on March 6, 2012 is to use it as material price for D gratuitous construction or as political funds of Mongolia for the politicians, etc.

According to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted earlier, the victims were deemed to have deposited KRW 700 million into the account of Defendant E’s operation on March 6, 2012, and have recognized the possibility that the Defendant would have used the said money for any purpose other than the execution fund, but the victims would have deposited the said money with the Defendant on March 6, 2012 at the time of deposit of KRW 700 million into the Defendant’s side.

1) The victim F consistently stated in the investigative agency and this court that “the Defendant paid KRW 700 million to the Defendant for the materials cost for D gratuitous construction”.

2) At the time, around January 2012, the Defendant agreed with the Victim F and G to provide D free of charge to the public official H et al. of Ulsanan City, Ulsan Metropolitan City public official H et al. and Ulsan Metropolitan City public official H et al., and agreed to start D installation from May 2012. Since January 2012, the Defendant was in a situation where it is necessary to purchase D installation immediately from May 2, 2012, and the Defendant requested the Victim F to provide funds as the price of D installation requires KRW 70 million.1)

3) On March 6, 2012, the Victim F and G remitted KRW 700 million from the AL Corporation’s account to the E Corporation account. If the victims were to have intent to transfer KRW 700 million to the Defendant as political funds from the beginning, it is difficult to understand with the intention of transferring KRW 700 million to the Defendant’s personal account, not paying in cash, or transferring the accounts from the corporation account at issue to the corporate account.

4) Even according to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant stated that, prior to being paid KRW 700 million, the Defendant only delivered the victims with KRW 700 million to the political real world in Mongolia, but did not specifically talk with any person to pay the said money. However, the Defendant’s assertion that the victims paid the said KRW 700 million to anyone in a situation where he/she is not aware of the fact that the victims might receive the said money.

5) Around August 2012, the Defendant stated that the budget for D execution was not finalized until the victims of Mongolia, and that the victims would pay money directly to D materials suppliers, etc. on March 6, 2012. However, the victims’ statement that the Defendant would have paid KRW 700 million to the victims of Mongolia, but the Defendant would not have paid KRW 700 million to the victims of Mongolia, including the Defendant’s money to receive political funds, up to KRW 200 million, and the Defendant would not have paid KRW 700 million to the victims of Mongolia, and the Defendant would not have paid KRW 170 million to the victims of Mongolia, and the Defendant would not have paid KRW 70 million to the public officials of Mongolia for the use of political funds from Mongolia, including KRW 1.7 billion to December 21, 2012.

B. Whether 700 million won has been used as political funds

Next, it is examined whether the defendant actually transferred 700 million won as political funds to AM through Don Don Don as political funds on March 7, 2012.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted earlier, the Defendant appears to have used the above KRW 700 million for the repayment of obligations, etc. of E, and had deceiving the victims, as if they were her possession of political funds on the ground of the processed person, N and AM.

1) On March 7, 2012, the Defendant, at a AP hotel located in the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government AO, sent the victim G’s birth together with Mongolia, and introduced M, as the President of Mongolia’s office and the member of the Revolution, the Defendant: (a) introduced the false name boxes to M; and (b) laid down a white bag of the contents in favor of M, before being viewed by M.

2) ① The Defendant explained to the victims that political funds worth KRW 700 million were sent to AS assistant through the President Qu in Korea. On the other hand, the investigation agency made a statement to AM through Mongolia, a stop of Mongolia, and the Defendant made a call with AM, N, and N's representative before or after March 7, 2012. However, the Defendant did not have the telephone details with the above people, and the Defendant did not know of his phone numbers, ③ there was no record of departure and entry into Korea in Mongolia, ③ the Defendant appears to have not used the name of Mongolia, and ③ the Defendant appears to have made a false statement to the public official in Mongolia, and the Defendant appears to have made a false statement to the public official in Mongolia, and ⑤ The Defendant appears to have made a false statement to the public official in Mongolia and made a false statement to the public official in Mongolia, ⑤ The Defendant appears to have been present to have made a false statement to the public official in Mongolia, and ⑤ the Defendant made a false statement to the public official in Mongolia and made a false statement to the public official in Mongolia.

3) 또한 ① 피고인은 수사기관에서 2013. 8. 1. 이전에는 "2013. 3. 7. AN에게 7억 원을 1억 원권 수표 1장과 1억 5,000만 원권 수표 4장으로 건네주었고, 2013. 3. 중순경 AM에게 7억 원을 전달받았는지를 확인했는데 AM가 전달받지 못했다고 했고, 이후로 AM와 연락이 끊겨서 7억 원이 어떻게 사용되었는지 알지 못한다"라고 진술하다가 위 수표 5장의 추적 결과가 확인된 이후인 2013. 8. 1.에는 "AN가 7억 원의 수표를 받은 이후에 이를 현금으로 바꾸어달라고 부탁하여 지인인 P, AW 등에게 부탁하여 7억 원 수표를 모두 현금화했다'라고 진술을 번복한 점.6 ② 피고인은 지인인 P, O를 통해 위 수표 5장을 1,000만 원권 수표, 100만 원권 수표 등으로 교환하였고, 피고인의 지인인 AW, S, AH, AF와 피고인의 처남인 Q 등에게 부탁하여 위 지인들의 친칙인 R.7) AA8) U,9) AX, AYO) 등의 계좌로 교환한 수표를 입금하여 현금으로 교환하게 하거나 피고인의 채무자인 AE, AC, AD, AZ, AI 등에게 입금하게 한 점, 3 7억 원 중에서 피고인이 E의 채무 변제 등의 용도로 사용하였음을 인정하는 금액이 2억 5,270만 원인데, 피고인은 "위 0, BA, AD, AE를 알지 못하고, 이들 관련 거래는 AU이 한 거래이다"라고 허위 진술하였고, 11) P, Q, AH, U 등은 피고인의 부탁을 받고 피고인과 관계없이 받은 수표인 것처럼 허위진술을 하였으며,12) 2012. 3. 16.부터 2013. 6. 21.까지 피고인이 사용하는 피고인의 대구은행 계좌 및 농협은행 계좌, BB 명의의 농협은행 계좌 및 국민은행 계좌, 주식회사 E 명의의 농협은행 계좌 및 국민은행 계좌, 주식회사 Z 명의의 국민은행 계좌 등에 166,450,000원과 미화 28만 달러가 입금되었는바, 피고인이 실제 사용한 금액은 피고인이 인정하는 금 2억 5,270만 원 이상일 것으로 보이는 점, ④ 피고인은 2012. 10.경 피고인의 처남인 Q에게 1억 1,900만 원 상당의 수표를 건네며 이를 현금으로 교환해달라고 부탁하였는데, 2012. 3.경에서 7개월이 경과한 2012. 10.까지도 피고인이 AN에게 건네주었다고 하는 수표를 보관할 이유가 없는 점, 0 피고인은 2012. 2. 15.경 AM에게 E가 몽골에 설립할 자회사인 BC의 주식 20%와 BC가 수입하는 제품에 대한 독점판매권을 20만 불에 양도하기로 약정하였고, 그 약정에 따라 20만 불을 받아 사용한 것이라고 진술하나, 피고인은 AM가 애초에 정치자금으로 100만 불을 요구했으나 피해자들이 65만 불만 지급하였다고 진술하였는바,13) 피고인이 20만 불을 다른 용도로 사용하는 것이 가능했을지 의문이고, 피고인이 사용한 2억 5,270만 원은 20만 불을 초과하는 점 등을 종합하여 보면, 피고인은 위 7억 원을 정치자금이 아닌 E의 채무 변제 등의 용도로 사용하고도 7억 원의 수표추적결과 피고인이 개인적으로 사용한 사실이 드러나지 않게 하기 위해 피고인의 친척, 지인 명의로 수표를 현금으로 교환한 것으로 보인다.

Grounds for sentencing

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for not less than three years but not more than 35 years;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria;

【Determination of Types and Decision of Recommendations】

○ Fraud (2013 Gohap971): Fraud, Type 3 (the amount of profit is at least 500 million won but less than 5 billion won) among general fraud, and the scope of recommending punishment shall be three to six years of imprisonment (the basic area).

○ The injury caused by occupational negligence (2013, 1122): Traffic crimes, one of the general traffic accidents (the injury caused by traffic accidents), and the scope of recommendations (basic area) from April to October (the basic area).

[Scope of the revised punishment according to the guidelines for handling multiple crimes] The basic crime, which is a violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Fraud) shall be added to the upper limit (six years of imprisonment) of the sentence scope of the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, which is concurrent crimes.

3. Determination of sentence;

The crime of this case is committed in Mongolia by deceiving the victim as if the defendant used it for D execution funds in Mongolia, and the defendant acquired 700 million won by deceiving the victim, and even after the fact that the defendant would promptly give the public official in Mongolia with political funds, the victim is belonging to the victim, and further, the victims who demanded the return of KRW 700 million as if they were to receive business rights in various Mongolia in return for political funds, and the victim avoided the return of KRW 700 million in return for political funds, and even though the amount of damage reaches KRW 700 million, the damage does not completely recover from damage. Nevertheless, the defendant's bill should be punished for the defendant's business by taking into account the best of the island where it is consistent with the statement that is difficult to continue to receive without opposing the error of assets.

In addition, the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of six months for embezzlement in 1995, six years for a violation of the Drugs Control Act of 199, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, family environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., and the sentencing guidelines specified in the arguments of this case shall be determined as per the order, comprehensively taking into account the following factors.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Seo-won

Judges 00 Efficacy

2) 21-24 pages of investigation records

3) In light of the fact that the date of preparation is indicated as the date of May 2012, but the certificate of personal seal impression attached to the performance memorandum was issued as of 1.14.2, 2012, 11, and 17.0 as of the date of preparation of the performance memorandum written on a similar content, the date of preparation of the performance memorandum seems to have been stated retroactively (Article 201-204 of the Investigation Records).

4) AU or AV’s guidance is unclear.

(v) 1828 pages of the investigation records

6) 751-753 pages of the investigation records

7) The sentence of S shall be imposed.

8) It is AH’s father and wife.

9) It is the birth of BA.

10) AX is Q ASEAN, and AY is Q Q son.

11) Investigation Records No. 1368-1369

12) Investigation Records No. 715-717, 735, 1061

13) Investigation Records No. 1605 to 1606