Defendant

Prosecutor

Mobile Constitution

Law Firm Jeong, Attorney Lee Sang-ok

Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2008Gohap1853 Decided December 5, 2008

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted by 50,000 won into one day.

The provisional payment of the amount equivalent to the above fine shall be ordered.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, around January 8, 2007, the fact that the defendant prepared a list of names and resident registration numbers of Non-Indicted 1 as if he/she were qualified as an insurance solicitor belonging to (name omitted) in the process of concluding the insurance solicitation agency contract, and submitted it to the interested country life life by reporting the name and resident registration number of Non-Indicted 1 as if he/she were qualified as an insurance solicitor. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and making a mistake of finding the defendant not guilty.

2. Determination

Around December 206, the Defendant: (a) prepared a list of non-indicted 1’s resident registration numbers (name omitted); and (b) delivered the list to non-indicted 2, the director of the planning team (name omitted) without the consent of the non-indicted 1; (c) prepared a list of non-indicted 2’s resident registration numbers to be used in the process of signing the contract with the non-indicted 1’s company; and (d) prepared a list of non-indicted 2’s life insurance applicants including the name of the non-indicted 1’s resident registration number and the director of the management support team (name omitted); and (d) prepared a list of non-indicted 2’s life insurance applicants including the name of the non-indicted 1’s resident registration number and the director of the planning team to be used in the process of signing the contract with the non-indicted 1’s company; and (e) prepared a list of non-indicted 2’s life insurance applicants to be used in the process of signing the contract with the non-indicted corporation name and the defendant.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thereby, it erred in the judgment.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the prosecutor's appeal is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

The defendant is the chief of the general affairs division of the corporation (name omitted) that sells insurance products.

On January 8, 2007, the corporation (name omitted) entered into a contract for interesting life insurance companies and insurance agency companies.

However, if a qualified person for insurance solicitation (a person who passed the qualification examination of the life insurance association and who has worked as a regular worker in an insurance company) retires from a corporate agency, he/she should cancel a retired person registered with the Korea Life Insurance Association through the future set which entered into the above interesting life insurance contract or the past insurance solicitation corporate agent contract, which requires approximately 15-20 hours.

On the other hand, since there are many persons who are qualified to be engaged in insurance solicitation, many of them can be engaged in insurance solicitation, it is favorable to both (title omitted) and interesting life in relation to the conclusion of the contract of insurance solicitation agencies.

Around December 2006, the Defendant: (a) around December 2006, at the office of the 6th floor (title omitted) office of the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Metropolitan Government, and (b) at the office of the 32nd floor building without Nonindicted Party 1’s consent, Nonindicted Party 1 already left the office (title omitted); (c) as Nonindicted Party 1 had worked in the (title omitted) the resident registration number of Nonindicted Party 1, the Defendant prepared a list of (title omitted), the executive officers of the legal entity, and qualified persons, stating the resident registration number of Nonindicted Party 1, and had Nonindicted Party 1 submit it to the interest country life

1. The statement of the witness in this court by Nonindicted 3

1. The statement of the witness Nonindicted 2 in the third trial record of the court below

1. The statement of each part of the prosecutorial protocol of the defendant concerning the interrogation of the suspect (including Nonindicted 2’s statement) and the police interrogation protocol

1. Statement of prosecutorial statement on Nonindicted 4

1. Statement of the police statement against Nonindicted 1 and 2

1. A report on the conclusion of an insurance agency contract, a corporation, agency, officer and qualified list;

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

Article 21 (2) 9 of the former Resident Registration Act (amended by Act No. 8422 of May 11, 2007) and selection of fines

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Judges Lee Ho-ho (Presiding Judge)