logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.04.09 2014고단4000 (3)
결혼중개업의관리에관한법률위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

C is a disguised marriage broker who recruits Koreans whose economic conditions are difficult to be given full terms and conditions of travel expenses in Vietnam and prepares marriage documents, etc. to connect Vietnams who want employment to the Republic of Korea so that they can enter the Republic of Korea and make a marriage. The defendant is a Korean marriage broker who is a disguised one who is to receive the price and make a disguised marriage with D, and E is a person who introduces the defendant to C for a disguised marriage by introducing the recruitment of Korean women under C's instruction.

C requested E to introduce “if a person wishes to be punished for money through a funeral marriage, to introduce him/her,” and E recruited the Defendant on May 201, on condition that he/she would provide all expenses and consideration for Vietnam travel.

C had the defendant paid KRW 5 million to the defendant, had the defendant receive KRW 2 million with the fee, and had the defendant prepare documents necessary for the report of marriage, and had the defendant reported the marriage without the genuine intention of marriage.

C and D reported false facts to the public official in charge of family relation registration, and entered false facts in the Defendant’s family relation information system in the Defendant’s public official’s family relation registration and recorded false facts into the public official’s electronic records, and around that time, preserved the public electronic records containing false facts of marriage in the public official’s family relation registration information system.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with C, D, and E, entered false facts in the public electronic records, and exercised the public electronic records containing such false facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police officer against H, C, and D.

arrow