2015 Madle1 Fraud

1. A (67 years, remaining) and drivers;

2. B (60 years, remaining) and drivers;

Public prosecution (prosecutions) and Kim Jong-Un (Public Trial)

Samsung Law Firm (Private Ship for Defendant A)

Attorney Clerks in charge

Law Firm Name (private ships for Defendant B)

Attorney Park Jong-soo, Do-ho

August 13, 2015

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Criminal History Office

Defendant B was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for the crime of occupational embezzlement at the Ulsan District Court on February 7, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 21, 2014.

Defendant B served as the representative director of C, a superior company, established for the purpose of preparing and arranging coming-of-age, marriage, funeral and ancestor worship, etc., located at ○○○, Nam-gu, Ulsan-gu, Busan-gu, 1994. Defendant B is a person who has been engaged in the above company’s business activities since 200.

On February 2, 2009, Defendant B instructed Defendant A to seek a person from whom the current financial situation of the company is difficult to invest money, and Defendant A attempted to seek a person to invest in money according to his direction, and Defendant A conspired to receive an investment on the condition of high-rate profit distribution, along with the monthly salary of the high-ranking amount, for which it is difficult to continue to pay to Defendant B as the victim during the process of entering into the process of Defendant B and, at the same time, to receive an investment on the condition of high-rate profit distribution.

Defendant A, in the first half of June 200, was in Samsan-dong, Ulsan-gu, Busan-do, the first half of which is the Defendant, “A” and “C, a commercial steering company, at the inside of the Republic of Korea, shall have an asset of approximately KRW 1.2 billion, and even if only the assistance fee is made on the first half of the month, about KRW 150 million is deposited, and KRW 300 million shall be deposited in the capital due to the amendment of the Act on the Side Transactions between Cho Man-do, and this money shall not be deposited in the bank, and shall not be withdrawn, and it shall not be required to deposit in the bank, approximately 30 million of the assistance fee, and it shall not be known that 30 million won should be deposited in the bank at approximately 30% of the assistance fee, 30% of the share of C, if the investment of KRW 300,000,000,000 won is paid in proportion to Defendant A’s position at the end of May of each year.

However, the above company's net losses of approximately KRW 1.2 billion as of the end of 2006, approximately KRW 1.3 billion as of the end of 2007, KRW 1.3 billion as of the end of 2007, and KRW 1.5 billion as of the end of 2008, shall be accumulated annually.

In this case, even though the end of 2006 debt amounted to approximately KRW 8.1 billion, the assets are merely about KRW 2.8 billion, and the assets are about KRW 5.3 billion, but the assets were about KRW 3.3 billion, and the assets were about KRW -6.6 billion, KRW 9.7 billion, but the assets were about KRW 1.5 billion, but the assets were about KRW 1.5 billion, and KRW 8.1 billion, the assets were about KRW 8.1 billion, and the assets were about KRW 1.5 billion, and the assets were about KRW 8.1 billion, so it was difficult to continuously increase the profits to the victims, and the Defendants did not think that they did not immediately withdraw the capital amount to KRW 300,000,000 and KRW 5.5 billion,000,000,000.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to deception the victim as above and received 300 million won from the victim’s bank account in the name of the above company at around the 9th of the same month.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant A's partial statement (the defendant B)

1. Defendant B’s partial statement

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. A’s partial statement of the witness A (as to Defendant B),

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of each prosecutor's suspect about Defendant A and B (as stated in Category D)

b)

1. The prosecutorial statement against Defendant A;

1. Kim*, Kim *, Lee, Lee *, D, this* Each prosecutor's protocol of statement about *

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. An investigation report (Attachment to the Installment Transactions Act), an investigation report (Attachment to the list of current members to be refunded);

An investigation report (a balance sheet and income statement); an investigation report (a passbook and a copy of a check number);

In the investigation report (a detailed attachment of the Director of the Nong Livestock Government's cashier's Office); each investigation report (deposit confirmation);

Requests for financial transaction information and reply

1. A written complaint and a written complaint;

1. A certificate, a funding plan, a remittance statement, a copy of C copy of the register, or a copy of the register (Ulsan-gu);

New-dong ○○○), each building lease agreement, response to request for investigation by the Korea Consumer Agency, membership transfer system

Contract, copy of the judgment (Evidence No. 60, Investigation Record No. 993)

1. Previous records of judgment: References to criminal records and copies of written judgments (Ulsan District Court 2014Sang63);

Application of Statutes

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

Defendants: Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; the choice of imprisonment

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

Defendant B: the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

Reasons for sentencing

[Scope of Recommendation Form]

General Fraud Type 2 (not less than KRW 100, less than KRW 500,00) basic area (one year to four years)

【Special Convicted Persons】

None

【Determination of Sentence】

Considering the fact that the amount of damage caused by the instant crime is KRW 30 million, the damage has not been recovered until now, the victim wants to punish the Defendants, and the Defendants have no reflectiveness, such as denying the commission of the crime, etc., the sentence of sentence is inevitable for the Defendants. However, the Defendants appear to have committed the instant crime for the purpose of living a company that has become difficult due to the aggravation of finance due to the operation or work of the Defendants for a considerable period of time (which seems to have been used as company funds). Defendant B is in the relationship between the previous offense of this case and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the previous offense of this case, and thus, it is necessary to consider the Defendants’ age, occupation, character and behavior, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., and thus, the sentence shall be determined by taking into account various factors of sentencing as above, including the following factors.

Judges Lee Gyeong-won