2013 Highest 147 (Consolidation), 1424 (Consolidation)

Fraud, Violation of the Labor Standards Act

Residential Suwon City

(The number of detention houses at present)

Standard place of registration

A person shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for each crime of fraud against himself/herself and each violation of the Labor Standards Act in April and August.

On December 20, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment for fraud at the Suwon District Court, and on December 28, 2006, the judgment became final and conclusive on August 14, 2008, when he was released from the said prison as a special amnesty on October 23, 2008. On September 27, 2012, the term of imprisonment was terminated. The Suwon District Court was sentenced to one year and eight months of imprisonment for fraud at the Suwon District Court, and became final and conclusive on February 15, 2013.

[2012 Highest 4702]

1. On September 2005, the Defendant made a false statement to the head of the entertainment planning office operated by the Defendant located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, to return the principal invested in making an investment to the victim Kim-won, and Gangnam-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, along with the dividend within two months.

However, there was no intention or ability to return investment profits or principal by selling music records to the defendant.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim from the victim Kim Jong-dong to make an investment, took over the sum of KRW 3 million on October 4, 2005, KRW 8.1 million on August 4, 2005, KRW 6.5 million on March 24, 2006, KRW 1.5 million on March 27, 2006, KRW 2 million on September 16, 2005, KRW 350,000 on September 16, 2005, KRW 50,000 on the same name, KRW 1.5 million on October 4, 2005, KRW 107,00 on the same month, KRW 4.5 million on the same month, KRW 1.4 million on the same month, and KRW 1.5 million on the same date, respectively.

2 . 피고인은 2010 . 1 . 4 . 경 서울 강남구 논현동에 있는 임피리얼팰리스 호텔 지하 바에 서 피해자 김♡♡에게 " 배우 최강희가 출연하는 ' 일년에 열두 남자 ' 라는 SBS공중파 드 라마를 제작하기로 하였는데 , 위 드라마 제작에 투자하면 2배 이상의 수익을 보장한 다 . " 라고 거짓말하였다 .

However, the facts did not have the intention or ability to produce the drama and return the investment return or the principal to the defendant.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received from the victim a transfer of KRW 60,300,000,000 on January 4, 2010, KRW 500,000 on the 14th of the same month, KRW 18,90,000 on the 18th of the same month, KRW 60,000,000 on the 630,000 on the 29th of the same month, from the victim for the purpose of investment.

3 . 피고인은 2011 . 6 . 경 서울 강남구 논현동에 있는 임피리얼팰리스 호텔 레스토랑에서 피해자 이 ( ( 에게 " 연세대학교 입학처장을 잘 알고 있는데 그에게 부탁하여 당신 딸 을 입학시켜 주겠다 . " 라고 거짓말하였다 .

However, in fact, there was no intention or ability to return the money received from the victim because the victim did not have the intention or ability to allow the victim to enter the school of the household.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received a remittance of KRW 210 million, including KRW 5,00,000 on June 27, 201, KRW 100 million on July 1, 201, KRW 60,000 on August 4, 201, and KRW 210,000,000 on the pretext of teaching expenses, etc. from the victim.

4. On February 2, 2011, the Defendant: (a) before the LG Licensed Real Estate Agent Office located in the GGGG Real Estate Office in the GGG Real Estate Office in the GGG Real Estate Office in the GG Real Estate Office in the GG Real Estate Office in the GG Real Estate Office in the GG Real Estate Office in the GGG Real Estate District in the GG Real Estate Office, the Defendant: (b) purchased a house with monthly rent of KRW 10 million; (c) sought a house with monthly rent of KRW 30 million; and (d) granted monthly rent of KRW 30 million with the proceeds of investment in real estate;

However, even if the defendant received money from the victim, there was no intention to use it as a monthly rent deposit, and there was no intention or ability to return the profits by investing in real estate.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received the victim as the monthly rent deposit from the victim, and acquired it by deceptioning KRW 40 million on February 16, 201, including KRW 16,00,000,000 for real estate investment, and KRW 38,000,000 for real estate investment in the same month.

[2012 Highest 5932]

피고인은 2010 . 12 . 7 . 서울 강남구 논현동에 있는 임페리얼 팰리스호텔 로비에서 피 해자 이아이에게 " 극장식 패밀리호프집을 계획하고 있고 분당 , 일산 , 홍대 , 건대에 지 점을 낼 예정이다 . 다른 데는 다 결정이 되었고 분당점만 남아 있는데 , 이것도 하겠다 는 사람이 많아 빨리 결정을 하지 않으면 안 된다 . 할 생각이 있으면 지점 가맹점비 8 , 000만 원을 내면 시설은 본사에서 다 해주겠다 . " 라고 거짓말을 하였다 .

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any specific progress in addition to the flexible indemnity related to the extreme fashion program. However, even if the Defendant received the franchise fee from the victim, there was no intention or ability to establish a franchise store for the victim, such as damaging the store facilities.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received from the victim, KRW 10 million on December 7, 2010, KRW 500,000 on August 8 of the same month, KRW 10,500,000 on October 10 of the same month, KRW 80,000 on the aggregate of KRW 14.1,5 million on the same month, and KRW 80,000 on the sum of KRW 80,000 from the victim to the bank account in the name of ○○ designated by the Defendant.

[2012 Highest 5954]

1. Fraud against the victim's child;

A. On May 2010, the Defendant called the Victim’s Posman to “IPO (former Company No. 200)” and took part in the society, such as the transfer of a member of the National Assembly of Korea National Assembly on behalf of the Intellectual Property Organization for the Intellectual Property Organization. The IPO is concluded within three months, and a considerable amount of profits after three months will be made investments. The principal would be guaranteed. “The IP would be false.”

However, there was no operational owner prior to the listing (the pre-listed company disclosure procedure) and the defendant did not have any intention or ability to return the investment principal and the profits after three months, even if he received the money from the victim as the main investment fund.

On May 12, 2010, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as such; (b) obtained the remittance of KRW 20,000,00 from the victim as investment money; and (c) obtained the money by defrauded.

나 . 피고인은 2010 . 9 . 경 서울 금천구 가산동 ( 주 ) ♦♦사무실에서 피해자 유◇◇에게 " 슈팅호프라는 맥주 프랜차이즈를 일산에 1호점을 오픈할 예정인데 가맹점비가 1억 원 이다 . 가맹점비만 내면 직영점처럼 회사에서 직영점 인테리어 , 가게 계약 , 직원 관리 등은 다 해 주겠다 . " 라고 거짓말하였다 .

However, the franchise business called Singp is nothing more than the defendant's business plan, and as a result, the defendant did not actually proceed with this business, so the defendant could not open the franchise store at the same time as he promised to receive the franchise fees from the victim.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 10,00,00 from the victim under the name of a chain store operator on September 20, 2010, and received KRW 10,00 from the victim, as well as from around that time to January 12, 2012, the Defendant received KRW 99,078,00,00 as a total of 15 times as a member store fee, as described in the list of offenses (1) from around that time.

C. On January 7, 201, the Defendant would return the principal to the ombudsman and distribute 10% of the profits to the Defendant, on the ground that, in the MK Do Office operated by the Defendant, the victim U.K., the Defendant invested in the Defendant’s U.K. in money for the production of the drama in the movie and wing-in to the victim’s U.S. MK Do Office (the advertising fee received at the end of the drama) on the ground of PPL (the advertising fee received at the end of the drama), the principal would be returned and the Defendant would also distribute 10% of the profits. The Defendant made a false statement.

However, the facts did not have the ability to produce the above drama and did not have the ability to distribute the investment principal and the profits.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 30,00,00 as investment money from the victim, on January 10, 201, and received KRW 79,970,00 in total on four occasions from around that time to January 9, 201, as shown in the List of Crimes (2).

2. Victim Kim = Fraud

On April 22, 2011, the Defendant: (a) the Victim Kim at the high-dong MK Pool Office in Gamban-si, Gamban-si, Gamban-si;

= = “A chain store is able to set up a set without considering the relationship with the U.S.C., and provides a business explanation to the store. The beer franchise called Singp is planned to open the beer store in the U.S., but it is expected to open the beer store in the U.S., such as the store store in the franchise store in the franchise store, the store contract, and the direct management of the direct source. If you keep only the store, I would bring profits from the match if you keep only the store.

However, the franchise business is nothing more than the defendant's business plan, and the defendant could not open the franchise store at the same time as he promised, even if he received the franchise fee from the victim because he did not actually proceed with the business.

On April 25, 201, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 10,00,000 under the name of a chain store operator, and received KRW 50,00,00 under the same name as the 27th day of the same month.

3 . 피해자 이★★에 대한 사기

피고인은 2011 . 8 . 12 . 경 경기 용인시 수지에 있는 ' 주 ' 카페에서 피해자 이★★에게 " 3 , 000만 원을 투자하면 한 달 내로 연예인 직영의 프랜차이즈 커피전문점을 오픈해 주겠다 . " 라고 거짓말하였다 .

However, even if an insolvent financial situation makes it difficult to receive investment money, there was no intention or ability to open it with the specialty of the coffee's direct management.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 50,00,00 from the victim around August 12, 201, around KRW 15,00,00, around September 7, 201, KRW 15,00,000 around September 7, 201, KRW 6,00,000, KRW 00 around December 20, 201, and KRW 14,000 on December 22, 2011, and KRW 00, including KRW 14,00,000, and KRW 00.

4. Fraud in relation to the assistance of victims in the operation of the city;

On November 201, 201, the Defendant was organized by the victim Cho-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Sin-dong, Sin-si, Sin-si, Sin-si, Sin-si, Sin-si, for the victim's "SBS Broadcasting Station". The Defendant would have the victim gain profits from making up 3 and 4 times the amount of investment if he/she invests money in money for the purpose of this LBS Broadcasting Agreement.

However, there is no fact that the SBS broadcasting station organized the above drones, and therefore, the SBS broadcasting station did not have any intention or ability to repay the drones or receive investments.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 60,00,00 from the victim on November 14, 201, around KRW 30,00,00,00, around November 25, 201; KRW 20,000, around November 25, 201; and KRW 10,000, around December 10, 201; and KRW 60,00,00, including KRW 10,000, around December 10, 201.

[2013 Highest 147]

On July 23, 2009, the Defendant invested KRW 15 million to the Defendant’s broadcast so-called “12 South-North Korea broadcast so-called,” at the home of this ** The Defendant would give the Defendant a profit of KRW 1.5 times the investment amount if the Defendant made an investment of KRW 30,000 in December 30, 209.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim as such, received from the victim the total sum of KRW 30,000,000,000,000,000,000 on July 23, 2009, and KRW 9.8 million on July 31, 2009, under the pretext of investment from the victim.

[2013 Highest 1424]

The Defendant was an employer who operated entertainment and entertainment business under the name of “MY”. From December 10, 2010 to April 10, 2012, the Defendant did not pay 48,814,450 won in total of the wages of five workers as stated in the attached Form, including 11,290,320 won in total, and 48,814, and 450 won in total, from the date of retirement, to the date of retirement without agreement on the extension of the due date between the parties.

Summary of Evidence

[2012 Highest 4702]

[Judgment 1 to 3]

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1 . 김♡♡ , 이 ( ( 에 대한 각 검찰 진술조서

1 . 김☆☆ , 강☆☆ , 김♡♡에 대한 각 경찰 진술조서

1. Each certificate of deposit;

1. Details of transactions in each account;

1. Each complaint;

[Judgment No. 4]

1. The purport that the defendant has received 40 million won from the Matril Matri, the highest Matril in this Court

Statement

1. The witness’s legal statement in △△;

1. Details of account transactions;

1. A report on investigation (the receipt and report of a monthly housing tax contract);

[2012 Highest 5932]

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of an objection;

1. An interrogation protocol of the police concerning the suspect;

1. Each certificate of transfer;

1. Details of account transactions with ○○○ account;

[2012 Highest 5954]

[Judgment No. 1-A.]

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Legal statement of the witness;

1. Details of account transactions;

[Judgment No. 1-B, C]

1. Taking measures that the defendant has received money stated in the facts charged from the court, △△△△△△;

b. Statement

1. Legal statement of the witness;

1. Details of account transactions;

1. Each certificate of deposit;

1. Case explanatory note and copy of loan certificate (No. 7 No. 5 of the evidence list)

[Judgments 2 to 4]

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each complaint;

1. A copy of a hosting preference contract;

1. A copy of the contract directly operated by an artist;

1. A certificate of fact and a copy of a loan (No. 10 No. 5 of the evidence list);

1. Details of transactions in each account;

1. A copy of a bankbook;

[2013 Highest 147]

1. The defendant has received money stated in this Court, this** from the facts charged.

Statement

1. Witness this* Each legal statement *

1. A copy of each bankbook; and

[2013 Highest 1424]

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each criminal complaint and a petition;

【Prior Records of Judgment】

1. Investigation into criminal records;

1. A copy of each judgment;

1. Current status of personal confinement/Admittance;

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the selection of punishment for the crime;

Article 347 (1) of each Criminal Code (the fraud point, each victim's identity): Provided, That the victim's identity

In the case of each crime, each crime is covered by Article 109(1), Article 36(1), and Article 36(1) of the Labor Standards Act, and the choice of each imprisonment.

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

형법 제35조 ( 피해자 김♡♡ , 이 CC , 최□□ , 이아이 , 김 = = = = , 유 , 이★★ , 이 *

each crime of fraud against each party)

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

The latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of each Criminal Code (each fraud against the victim Kim-won, the Gangnam-gu, the Seoul Special Self-Governing Province, and the Gangwon-do Special Self-Governing Province on December 28, 2006; each fraud between the other victims; each fraud against the other victims; and fraud between the judgment and the judgment on February 15, 2013).

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the grounds for sentencing between the victims' Kim-ri, each of the crimes of fraud against the Gangnam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and between the other victims, each of the crimes of fraud against the other victims,

The Defendant, by deceiving a large number of victims while operating the entertainment planning company, acquired a large amount of money by deceiving them. The number of victims of the instant fraud is about 11, and the total sum of the damages before and after the final judgment on December 28, 2006, KRW 35,000,000,000 and KRW 800,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

Although the defendant was given sufficient opportunity in the trial of the first instance, he did not reach an agreement with the victims, the victims have not been recovered from the victims, and the victims have sought severe punishment.

Furthermore, the defendant not only has the same criminal power but also a considerable number of crimes have been committed during the repeated crime period, and the defendant should be punished corresponding to that act.

In addition to the various circumstances mentioned above, the conditions of sentencing, such as age, sex, environment, circumstances after the crime, circumstances after the crime, and equity in the case where the defendant was tried at the same time with the final judgment, was reflected in determining the punishment against the defendant.

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