A. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)

B. Violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act

(c) Fraud;

1.(a) A

2.(c) B

3.2. C.

4. (b) D.

5.2.2. E

6.b)F

7.b. G.

Documents and leathers (prosecutions) and public trial;

Attorney H, I (private ships for Defendant A and B)

Attorney J (Defendant C, D, E, F, and F)

March 30, 2017

1. Defendant A

Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

2. Defendant B

Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months.

However, with respect to the above accused, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive. The above accused shall be ordered to provide community service for 80 hours.

3. Defendants C, D, E, F, G C, D, E, F, and G are punished by a fine of KRW 3 million. In a case where the above Defendants did not pay the above fine, each of the above Defendants shall be confined in the Labor House for the period calculated by converting the amount of KRW 100,000 into one day.

To order the above Defendants to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine.

Criminal Facts

Defendant A is a person in charge of overall accounting affairs, etc. of the victim company while serving as the Vice Minister of Accounting and Materials of the victim company KElectronic Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “victim company”) from around December 20, 201 to December 31, 201. Defendant B and Defendant C are high school-friendly members of Defendant A, Defendant D are the relatives of Defendant B, Defendant E is the parents of Defendant B, Defendant E is the parents of Defendant B. Defendant F is the parents of Defendant B, Defendant F is the parents of the husband L, and Defendant G is aware of the transaction relation with L.

1. Defendant A’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and Defendant B’s fraud committed an act as a general manager in charge of the accounting affairs of the victim company, and the victim company’s employee membership management is weak, and even if the victim claimed for false benefits, Defendant A was provided with necessary documents for entry from his family, relatives, and siblings, and attempted to receive monthly salary, transportation expense, etc. from the victim company and obtain them by deception, by pretending that the document holders were employed by the victim company and worked for the victim company.

A. The defrauded of C benefits, etc.: around March 1, 2012, Defendant A pretended to become a member of the victim company office located in the window of Changwon-si, and submitted employment-related documents, such as a certified copy of the resident registration in the name of C, a copy of the benefit passbook, etc., and filed a claim for payment by preparing the statement of payment in the name C and the statement of payment in the name of C. However, Defendant A did not actually work for the victim company. However, Defendant A deceiving the president of the victim company, thereby deceiving Defendant A to receive KRW 2,147,030 on April 15, 2012 from around that time to January 1, 2016, and acquired KRW 46 times in total under the name of C, such as benefits, transportation expenses, bonuses, etc., and jointly acquired KRW 123,449,916, Sep. 16, 2016.

On March 2013, the Defendants received documents necessary for their entry from the figures of Defendant B at the N Office of the N Office of Chang-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, and submitted the documents as if D and E were employed in the victim company, and conspired to divide monthly wages, transportation expenses, etc. from the victim company in their names.

(1) Fraud of D's benefits, etc.

On March 2013, Defendant A received a certified copy of the resident registration card, benefit passbook, and cash card in the name of Defendant B through Defendant B, through Defendant B, and submitted a copy of the resident registration card, a copy of the benefit passbook, and other documents related to the entry, as if D entered the victim company, and filed a claim for benefits by preparing the benefit slip in the name of D and the statement of withdrawal and withdrawal. However, in fact D did not actually work for the victim company.

As such, the Defendants conspired to deception the president of the victim company and received KRW 1,595,375 on April 15, 2013 from the victim company to the national bank account in the name of D for D’s benefit, and acquired KRW 96,487,07 in total from around 2015 to December 2015, including the amount of KRW 15,595,375 on April 15, 2013.

(2) Fraudulent of E benefits, etc.

On March 2013, Defendant A received a certified copy of the resident registration card, the benefit passbook, and the cash card under Defendant B via Defendant B, and submitted the entry-related documents, such as a certified copy of the E’s resident registration, a copy of the benefit passbook, and a copy of the benefit passbook, as if Party B entered the victim company, and filed a claim for benefits. However, in fact, E did not actually work for the victim company.

As such, the Defendants conspired, by deceiving the president of the victim company, and thereby deceiving the victim company to transfer the amount of KRW 1,530,781 to the national bank account in the name of E for the benefit of E from the victim company as well as acquired KRW 93,010,884 in total from around 15, 2013 to January 1, 2016, such as wages, transportation expenses, bonuses, etc. from the victim company 34 times in total as shown in the attached crime sight list (3).

C. Fraud of L wage, etc.: Defendant A, on March 2, 2012, pretended to become a partner of the victim’s office, Defendant A submitted a resident registration certificate in the name of L and a copy of the benefit passbook, etc.; and thereafter, Defendant A requested the victim to pay benefits by preparing a statement of payment in the name of L and a statement of payment in the name of L and a statement of withdrawal and withdrawal. However, Defendant A, by deceiving the president of the victim’s company as such, did not actually work for the victim company. Defendant A, by deceiving the victim company’s president, was remitted KRW 2,02,760 on April 15, 2012 to the national bank account in the name of L from that time to July 2, 2013 as shown in the attached list of crimes (4), and acquired KRW 41,72,754,784 in total from the victim company on a total of 17 occasions from that time to July 2013.

D. Fraud, such as F pay, etc.: (a) around June 3, 2013, Defendant A pretended to be employed by F in the victim’s office, Defendant A submitted employment-related documents, such as a certified copy of the resident registration in F name, a copy of the benefit passbook, etc.; and (b) requested the victim’s company to pay benefits by preparing a statement of payment in F name and a statement of payment and a statement of withdrawal and withdrawal. However, Defendant A, as such, did not actually work for the victim company; (c) deceiving the president of the victim company; (d) by deceiving the victim company’s company to be the national bank account in F’s name for F’s benefit; and (d) from around that time to January 3, 2016, Defendant A acquired KRW 86,91,51,515 won from the victim company for total 31 times, such as F’s benefits, transportation expenses, bonuses, etc.

E. The defrauded of G wage, etc.: (a) around November 1, 2013, Defendant A pretended to be a member of the victim’s company at the victim’s office, Defendant A submitted a copy of the resident registration card in the name of G, a copy of the benefit passbook, etc.; and (b) filed a claim for the payment by preparing the statement of payment in the name of G and the statement of payment in the name of G and the statement of withdrawal and withdrawal. However, Defendant A did not actually work for the victim company; (c) by deceiving the president of the victim company; (d) by deceiving the victim company’s M, the victim company was remitted to the national bank account in the name of G in the name of G from that time to January 1, 2016; and (e) obtained KRW 80,671,39,399 in total from the victim company on a total of 27 occasions from that time to December 15, 2013.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to acquire 189,497,891 won, and the Defendant A acquired 332,885,354 won.

2. Defendant A: Violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act

No person shall borrow or lend a means of access while receiving, demanding or promising to use an electronic card which is the means of access to an electronic financial transaction.

On February 2, 2012, at the defendant's office located in Changwon-si Co., Ltd. 104-8, 119 Dong 601, the defendant agreed to the effect that "if the defendant wants to go to a company because he/she is making efforts to do so, he/she is required to do so. If he/she lends a copy of his/her resident registration, the head of the Tong and cash card, 200,000 won per month in return." In return, the defendant borrowed the passbook of the National Bank in the name of C (651402-04-118680) and the cash card, which is an electronic card connected thereto, from around that time to November 2013, the defendant borrowed the means of access, such as a cash card, by promising five times in total, from five times in the same manner as indicated in the attached list of crimes (7).

3. Defendant B: Violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act;

On March 2013, the Defendant: (a) promised that “If he/she lends the passbook of the National Bank, which is a document required for the KS electronic membership of the Company, and the cash card, which is an electronic card connected with it, he/she will pay KRW 300,000 per month,” from E; (b) promised that he/she borrowed the passbook of the National Bank in the name of E and the cash card, which is an electronic card connected with it, from E, and received the means of access, such as the cash card, by promising two persons to make payment two times in the same manner as indicated in the attached list of crimes (8).

4. Defendant C.

On March 2012, the Defendant, at the above A’s house, loaned cash cards, which are electronic cards connected to the Defendant’s name, to the head of the national bank and the head of the Tong and the head of the electronic card, to the effect that “if you want to go to the company while you want to go to the company, you need to do so. If you lend a copy of thep’s resident registration, the head of the national bank and the cash card, you will make every 200,000 won per month.”

5. Defendant D

On March 2013, the Defendant, at the home of the Defendant located in the Seocho-gu, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, who was the Defendant, lent the cash card in the name of the Defendant’s bank account and the electronic card-based card connected thereto, to the Defendant, “I will be paid if I wanted to receive benefits if I wanted to do so by lending four names. I will be 300,000 won per month if I borrowed a copy of the four resident registration, a copy of the four resident registration, a passbook of the national bank, and a cash card.”

6. Defendant E

On March 2013, the Defendant, at the Defendant’s house located in Seocho-gu, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, agreed to, “I would be able to obtain benefits from the Defendant’s home and make it impossible to keep the Defendant’s credit card, which he works in his company. On behalf of the Defendant, I would be 300,000 won per month if I would make and lend a certified copy of the resident registration card, a passbook of the National Bank, a passbook of the National Bank, a cash card, etc., which is connected with the Defendant’s name.”

7. Defendant F

On June 2013, the Defendant, at the PC room located in Changwon-si's counter, lent to the Defendant's name bank account and cash card, which is an electronic card connected with the Defendant's name bank account and its electronic card, to the effect that it is difficult for the Defendant to go to the company due to bad credit holder to go to the company, and the documents, such as the passbook of the National Bank and the certified copy of the resident registration, can continue to pass to the company on face of the week. If the Defendant borrowed the four certified resident registration card, passbook, cash card, etc., then the Defendant borrowed the Defendant's name bank account and the cash card, which is an electronic card connected with it.

8. Defendant G.

On June 2013, the Defendant, at the mobile office located in the New Village of Changwon-si, lent to the Defendant’s bank account in the name of the Defendant and the cash card, which is an electronic card, connected with the Defendant, to the bank account in the name of the Defendant, with the promise of “if you have to go to their wife, and if you have to go to the company as a bad credit holder, it would be difficult to leave the country immediately. If you lend a four resident registration certificate, passbook, cash card, etc., then it would be 20 to 3 million won per month.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement of statement made by the police with respect to leap00 (Supplement of the criminal complaint representative);

1. Complaints and accompanying documents;

1. Application of each reply statute (Seoul Bank, New Bank, Korean Bank, Nonghyup, Nonghyup, and Korean National Bank);

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

A. Defendant A

Article 3(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter referred to as the "Special Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes"), Articles 347(1) and 30(6) of the Criminal Act (including fraud, including fraud), Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (the lending of access media and the choice of imprisonment). Defendant B

Articles 347(1) and 30(a) of the Criminal Act; Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (a) of the same Act and Article 6(3)2 (a) of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act. Defendant C, D, E, F, and G Electronic Financial Transactions Act (elective of fines) are Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)2 of the same Act.

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendant A and B: the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Discretionary mitigation;

- Defendant A: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., favorable circumstances for sentencing following the following)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

- Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of each Criminal Code, Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Code

1. Suspension of execution;

- Defendant B: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., favorable circumstances for sentencing)

1. Social service order;

- Defendant B: Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

- Judgment on the Defendant and defense counsel’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The assertion and judgment concerning the number of crimes

Defendant A and his defense counsel asserted that since each of the instant fraud crimes committed by Defendant A is not a single comprehensive crime, the Act on the Specific Economic Crimes should not be applied.

In the case of fraud, in which money is acquired through deception several times for the same victim, only a single crime of fraud is established if the criminal intent is a single and the method of crime is the same (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8645, Feb. 23, 2006).

Examining the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court in light of the aforementioned legal principles, it is reasonable to view Defendant A’s each of the instant fraud crimes to be a single and continuous crime, and the method of the crime is the same as that of the criminal. Therefore, Defendant A and his defense counsel’s above assertion is not acceptable.

① The method of committing each of the instant fraud and the victim are the same.

② The defraudation of wages, etc. against C and L from March 2012, from around March 2013 to around March 2013, the defraudation of wages, etc. against D and P began from around June 2013, and from around November 2013, the defraudation of wages, etc. against F with respect to G, such as wages, etc. However, each of the instant frauds continued by receiving every month wages, etc., rather than once. As such, even if the period of commencing the crime differs as above, since the period of commencing the crime was in existence, there is no essential difference in Defendant A’s criminal intent.

③ Defendant A committed a part of the fraud crime with Defendant A, but insofar as the applicable law is the same as that of Defendant A’s single fraud crime, Defendant A’s single fraud and the joint fraud crime do not constitute an essential difference in the criminal intent.

2. The assertion and judgment concerning the amount of defraudation

Defendant A, B, and their defense counsel asserted that only the amount actually received from the victim after deducting taxes, insurance premiums, etc. should be considered as "amount of profit" under Article 3 (1) of the Specific Economic Crimes Act.

In a crime of fraud the content of which is the taking-off of property, if there is a delivery of property by deception, the crime of fraud is established by itself as the infringement of the victim's property, and even if there is no considerable amount of compensation or damage to the whole property of the victim, even though it does not affect the establishment of the crime of fraud, it is not the difference between the value of the property given from the victim and the value of the property, and even if the money has been partially paid, the money acquired shall be the whole of the property received, not the difference between the value of the property given by the victim and the value of the property. This does not affect the establishment of the crime of fraud even if the property already acquired or the property gains have been returned after the fact.

Whether the sum of the values of goods and property benefits that have been provided is ultimately realized or whether such benefits have been realized (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do2236, Jun. 12, 2008).

Therefore, the sum of the amounts that the above defendants received from the victim company under the name of salary, transportation expenses, bonus, etc. due to the crime of deceitation of each of the above cases is "the amount of fraud fraud and the amount of profit under Article 3 (1) of the Specific Economic Crimes Act", not the amount of taxes, insurance premiums, etc. should be deducted and calculated. Therefore, the above arguments by the defendant A, B, and their defense counsel

Reasons for sentencing

1. Defendant A sentencing criteria;

[Extent of Recommendation] General Frauds of Type 3 (at least KRW 500,000, but less than KRW 5 billion) and Special Aggravation (at least KRW 4-10,000)

Where a criminal act has been committed repeatedly for a considerable period of time, the method of punishment is very poor.

Since the crime of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act is an offense for which the sentencing guidelines are not set, a sentence of at least the minimum of the recommended sentence of the above offense for which the sentencing guidelines are set is recommended.

(6) The amount of normal damage unfavorable to him/her shall be 522,383,245 won.

- Intelligent method of crime

- Unagreement

The crime has been committed repeatedly over a period exceeding 3 years;

◎ 유리한 정상

- Serious reflector

- Initials making efforts to recover damage, such as reimbursement of approximately KRW 200 million;

(1) Other factors of sentencing expressed in the course of the instant trial, including the age, character and conduct, motive and means of the offense, and circumstances after the offense, shall be determined by getting out of the lower limit of the sentencing criteria and the same sentence as the order.

2. Defendant B’s sentencing criteria

[Extent of Recommendation] General Fraud> Type 2 (at least KRW 100,000, less than KRW 500,00) Case (at least KRW 2.6 months to 6 years).

[Special Person] Where the Criminal Code is very poor;

[Scope of Final Recommendations]

The crime of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act is an offense for which the sentencing guidelines are not set, and thus, a sentence of more than the minimum sentence (two years and six months of imprisonment) to which the sentencing guidelines are set is recommended, is unfavorable.

-Agreement not on the Law of Intelligent Crimes 189,497,891 of the amount of damage

◎ 유리한 정상

- Serious reflector

-a principal offender who has received full payment of the amount actually gained by the Defendant (76,660,000 won) out of the amount obtained by deceit;

- Not leading the instant crime

(1) Other factors of sentencing expressed in the course of the instant trial, including the age, character and conduct, motive and means of the offense, and circumstances after the offense, shall be determined by getting out of the lower limit of the sentencing criteria and the same sentence as the order.

The presiding judge, judge and chief offender;

Judges Kim Gin-soo

Judges flooded Jins

1) ex officio correct part of the amount of damage in the facts charged

2) ex officio correct part of the amount of damage in the facts charged

3) ex officio correct part of the amount of damage in the facts charged.

4) Ex officio correct the year of the crime.

5) Ex officio correct the place of crime

6) Article 30 of the Criminal Act applies only to the joint criminal conduct with Defendant B.