Do 2013 Do 7604 A. Violation of the Act on Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Refiscing, etc.)

(Recognized name of crime: Matters concerning aggravated punishment for specific economic crimes, etc.

【Violation of Acts (Acceptanced)】

(b) Violation of the Act on Punishment, etc. of Aggravation of Specific Economic Crimes (receiveed as intermediary)

(c) Violation of the Act on Punishment, etc. for Specific Economic Crimes (Capital Increase, etc.);

(d) Offering property in breach of trust;

A

Defendant

Law Firm B (Attorney in Charge C, AL, AK)

Attorneys AS, AT, AU

Seoul High Court Decision 2012Do2500 decided June 14, 2013

September 13, 2013

The appeal shall be dismissed.

In the indication of the name of the original judgment, "A violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes for the Specific Economic Crimes (Embrye)" in the indication of the name of the original judgment is revised as "A violation of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes for the Specific Economic Crimes (Embrye).

The grounds of appeal (the statement of the grounds of appeal submitted after the lapse of the period for submitting a statement of grounds of appeal is within the scope that supplements the grounds of appeal) shall be determined.

Examining the reasoning of the original judgment in light of the evidence duly adopted by the lower court, it is justifiable to determine that the facts charged of the instant case are recognized as guilty on the grounds as stated in the judgment below, and to order the Defendant to additionally collect the amount of money as indicated in the judgment against the Defendant on the grounds of the same reasoning as indicated in the judgment of the lower court. There is no error by misapprehending the legal principles on the interpretation of matters falling under the duties of an officer or employee of the financial institution or the calculation of additional collection charges under Article 7 of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, contrary to the logical and empirical rules.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, but since it is clear that there are some errors in the judgment of the original court, it is decided to correct the appeal in accordance with Article 25 of the Criminal Procedure Rule. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Poe-young

Justices Min Il-young

Justices Lee In-bok

Justices Kim Shin-chul