Defendant 1 and two others

Park Young-young (Court) and Kim Jong-chul (Court of Justice)

Attorney Current status

Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for one year, and a fine of 5,00,000 won.

When Defendant 2 fails to pay the above fine, Defendant 2 shall be confined in a workhouse for the period calculated by converting 100,000 won into one day.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of the above sentence against Defendant 1 shall be suspended.

A sum of KRW 25,973,311 from Defendant 1 shall be collected.

To order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine against Defendant 2.

Defendant 1 shall order Defendant 1 to provide community service for 80 hours, such as nature protection activities, welfare facilities and group service activities, volunteer activities of public facilities, etc.

Defendant 3 (Defendant 2) is not guilty.

A summary of the above judgment shall be publicly announced to Defendant 3 (Defendant 2).

1. Joint criminal conduct by Defendant 1 and Defendant 2

Any person who intends to engage in foreign exchange business between the Republic of Korea and a foreign country, such as payment, collection, and receipt, shall prepare sufficient capital, facilities and professional human resources for conducting foreign exchange business and register such business with the Minister of Strategy and Finance in advance,

Defendant 1, with the trade name of “△△△○○”, recruited in Japan, brought in and returned to the Republic of Korea from the remitters, and went through a trial as a result of regulating the transfer agent business without registration to transfer money to the domestic receiver, Defendant 1, who borrowed Defendant 2’s name, lent the name to Defendant 2 in order to establish the money exchange center with the trade name “○○○○○ Refund” at another place on November 201, 201, and borrowed the name to Defendant 2 in the name of Defendant 2 in order to carry out the transfer agent business in the above manner. Defendant 2 agreed to establish the money exchange center in the above name of Defendant 2 with Defendant 2, who agreed to take charge of the money exchange and credit transfer, etc., and was willing to engage in the business without registration.

피고인 1은 2010. 11. 9. 일본에서 송금을 의뢰받고 일화를 반입한 성명불상자를 피고인 2가 있는 서울 중구 (주소 2 생략) ▽▽빌딩 3층 304호 ◇◇환전에 보내고, 피고인 2는 위 일화를 ☆☆은행 ◁◁동지점에서 은행매입환율(환전소 우대 환율)로 환전한 후 일정 수수료(은행 매입환율 적용 환전금액과 환전소 매입환율 적용 환전 금액의 차액)를 공제한 나머지 6,000,500원을 일본 내 송금인이 의뢰한 공소외 6의 계좌에 이체한 것을 비롯하여 그때부터 2011. 1. 7.까지 사이에 별지 주1) 범죄일람표 1 기재 중 피고인 2 명의의 ♤♤은행계좌 전부와 피고인 2 명의의 ▷▷은행 (계좌번호 생략)계좌 중 순번 1 내지 2887까지 총 3,783회에 걸쳐 같은 방법으로 일본에서 반입한 일화를 환전한 돈 합계 7,249,071,218원을 국내 수령인들의 계좌에 이체하였다.

As a result, Defendants conspired with the Minister of Strategy and Finance to engage in foreign exchange affairs such as payment, collection, and receipt between Korea and Japan.

2. Defendant 1’s sole criminal conduct

The above defendant 2 retired from work and was willing to directly employ the non-indicted 4, who is an employee of the defendant 2 to get off his work.

피고인은 2011. 1. 10. 일본에서 송금을 의뢰받고 일화를 반입한 성명불상자를 직원인 공소외 4에게 보내고, 위 공소외 4는 위 일화를 ☆☆은행 ◁◁동지점에서 은행매입환율(환전소 우대 환율)로 환전한 후 일정 수수료(은행 매입환율 적용 환전금액과 환전소 매입환율 적용 환전 금액의 차액)를 공제한 나머지 569,750원을 일본 내 송금인이 의뢰한 공소외 5의 계좌에 이체한 것을 비롯하여 그때부터 2011. 7. 5.까지 사이에 별지 범죄일람표 1 중 피고인 2 명의의 ▷▷은행 (계좌번호 생략)계좌 중 순번 2888 내지 103487까지 및 피고인 2 명의의 ▷▷은행 (계좌번호 2 생략) 계좌 전부, 총 9,619회에 걸쳐 같은 방법으로 일본에서 반입한 일화를 환전한 돈 합계 21,159,738,735원 국내 수령인들의 계좌에 이체하였다.

Accordingly, the Defendant, without registering with the Minister of Strategy and Finance, engaged in foreign exchange business such as payment, collection and receipt between the Republic of Korea and Japan.

1. Partial statement of the defendant 1 and 2

1. The entry of some of the statements made by the prosecution against the defendant 1 and the defendant 2 in the protocol of interrogation of suspect;

1. Some statements made against Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 in the protocol of suspect examination of the police;

1. The prosecutor’s statement concerning Nonindicted 4

1. Each police protocol against Defendant 2 and Nonindicted 4

1. Details of transactions of the exchange account in the name of Defendant 2;

1. Investigation into and reporting on the calculation methods of criminal proceeds;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Defendants: Article 27(1)5 of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, the main sentence of Article 8(1), Article 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendant 2: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant 1: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Social service order;

Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

Defendant 1: Article 30 of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendant 2: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant 1 and his defense counsel asserted that: (a) during the period from December 3, 2008 to September 28, 2010, the above Defendant brought in the Republic of Korea, which was collected at the request of transfer from Japan, without being registered with the Minister of Strategy and Finance through “△△△ exchange” in the name of Nonindicted 3, the Defendant, the Defendant, from December 3, 2008, and the said Defendant was sentenced to a fine on February 9, 201, the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 201No1388, the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2012Do2745, the dismissal of the appeal became final and conclusive on June 14, 2012, on the grounds that the criminal facts of this case are identical to the criminal facts of this case and the criminal intent of this case, and thus, the criminal facts of this case should be acquitted by the judgment of acquittal.

However, in the case of the criminal facts of this case, Defendant 2 operated the business in the name of Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (No. 2 omitted) ○○○○○○○ 304, Defendant 2 operated the business in the name of Jung-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (No. 2 omitted), and Defendant 2 worked in the actual place, instead of simply lending the name, and in the case of the criminal facts finalized against Defendant 2, Nonindicted 3 operated the business in the name of the “△△△△△△○” under the name of Jung-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (No. 1 omitted) 508, and the relevant accomplice and the place are different, and Defendant 1’s closing the above △△△△△△△△△○ was due to the commencement of customs investigation and the fact that it was no longer possible to continue the exchange business. Accordingly, the above argument is without merit.

1. Summary of the facts charged

Any person who intends to engage in foreign exchange business between the Republic of Korea and a foreign country, such as payment, collection, and receipt, shall prepare sufficient capital, facilities and professional human resources for conducting foreign exchange business and register such business with the Minister of Strategy and Finance in advance,

The Defendant had a mind to conduct a foreign exchange business without registration by transferring the remaining amount after deducting the following commission (amount applied to the purchase exchange rate in the exchange agency) from the exchange rate of bank purchase in the exchange center to the domestic recipient's account in which the remitter in Japan brought into the Republic of Korea:

피고인은 2011. 6. 28. 서울 중구 (주소 1 생략) 빌딩 508호에 있는 피고인 운영의 환전소(상호는 ◈◈◈, ◐◐, ♡♡환전으로 순차적으로 변경됨)에서, 일본에서 일화를 반입한 성명불상자로부터 일화를 받고 ☆☆은행 ◁◁동지점에서 은행매입환율(환전소 우대 환율)로 환전한 다음 일정 수수료(은행 매입환율 적용 환전금액과 환전소 매입환율 적용 환전 금액의 차액)를 공제한 나머지 1,592,375원을 일본 내 송금인이 의뢰한 정일선의 계좌에 이체한 것을 비롯하여 그때부터 2012. 5. 18.까지 사이에 별지 주2) 범죄일람표 2 기재와 같이 총 28,262회에 걸쳐 같은 방법으로 일본에서 반입한 일화를 환전한 돈 합계 70,396,261,105원을 국내 수령인들의 계좌에 이체하였다.

Accordingly, the Defendant, without registering with the Minister of Strategy and Finance, engaged in foreign exchange business such as payment, collection and receipt between the Republic of Korea and Japan.

2. Determination

가. 이에 부합하는 듯 한 증거로는 공소외 4의 경찰에서의 진술(피고인 1이 자신에게 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)이 일본에서 환전업을 했던 사람이라고 얘기했다, 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)이 일본에서 송금업체 ‘∈∈’를 운영하였다), 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)의 진술(자신이 일본에 거주하였을 때 공소외 4, 피고인 1을 알게 되었다, 환전소에 오는 고객이 일화 1천만 엔 내지 2천만 엔과 송금리스트를 가지고 오면 자신이 은행에서 환전후 리스트에 적혀 있는 계좌로 송금해주는 일을 했다, 환전소에서는 원칙상 고객으로 하여금 환전신청서를 작성하여 서명하도록 하고 고객의 주민등록증이나 여권 등 신분증을 확인하고 환전신청서를 토대로 환전장부를 작성하여야 하나 자신은 환전장부에 환전한 사람의 이름과 여권번호 등을 기재하지 않고 리스트에 있는 송금받는 사람을 기재하였다), 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)의 사무실이 피고인 1이 환전업을 하였던 동일한 장소인 서울 중구 명동 소재 □□□빌딩 508호인 사실, 피고인 1의 경찰에서의 진술(피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)과 공소외 1(대판:공소외인)이 일본에 거주할 때 송금업체인 ‘∈∈’를 이용해서 송금한다는 말을 공소외 1(대판:공소외인)로부터 들었다) 등이 있다.

나. 그러나 한편 피고인은 기획재정부장관에 등록한 환전업자인 사실, 피고인은 환전하러 오는 사람 중에도 현장에서 바로 원화로 환전해 가지 않고 본인 명의 통장으로 송금을 요청하는 사람도 있다고 진술하고 있는 점, 피고인 1은 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)이 운영하는 환전소업무에 관여하지 않았고, 자신이 △△환전을 할 당시 ‘∈∈’라는 상호로 한국에 일화 현금을 송금한 사람은 최사장이나 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)의 남편과 다른 사람이며 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)은 일본에 있을 때 송금업무를 한 사실이 없었다고 진술하고 있는 점, 공소외 4는 검찰에서는 경찰진술조서에 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)이 일본에서 송금업체를 운영하는 것처럼 기재되어 있는 것은 잘못 기재된 것이고, ‘∈∈’의 운영자가 최사장이나 공소외 1(대판:공소외인)과 동일인지는 모르며, 피고인 1로부터 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)이 환전업을 하는 것을 말렸다는 말을 들었다고 진술하고 있는 점, 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)이 위와 같은 영업으로 얻는 수익은 실제 그 금액을 환전소에서 환전하는 것과 수익에서 별다른 것이 없는 점에 비추어 앞서 본 증거만으로는 피고인 3(대판:피고인 2)이 일본의 송금업체와 연계되어 있음을 인정하기에 부족하고 달리 이를 인정할 증거가 없다.

C. In addition, Article 3 subparag. 16 (b) of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act provides that “payment, collection and receipt between the Republic of Korea and a foreign country” and Article 3(16 (e) of the same Act provides that “other business similar to the provisions of items (a) through (d) as prescribed by Presidential Decree” and Article 6 of the Presidential Decree provides that “business prescribed by Presidential Decree” means any of the following business: 1. Sale of securities or bonds denominated or paid in domestic currency with non-residents; 2. Sale of trust, insurance and derivatives between residents (limited to those related to foreign exchange; hereinafter the same shall apply) or between residents and non-residents; 3. Lease of facilities indicated in foreign currency (referring to facility leasing under the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act; hereinafter the same shall apply) and 4. Other business incidental to business under Article 3(1)16 (a) through (d) of the Act and subparagraph 1 through 3 of this Article cannot be deemed to be directly traded between the Republic of Korea and a foreign exchange authority and the defendant directly involved in foreign exchange transactions.

D. Although Defendant 3 (Counter-board: Defendant 2) did not violate the main sentence of Article 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act on the sole basis of the fact that the provision that a money exchange dealer should observe is true, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently, the above facts charged constitute a case where there is no evidence of crime, and thus, Defendant 3 (Counter-board: Defendant 2) is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices to publish the summary of the judgment against Defendant 3 (

[Attachment]

Judges Jeon Nam-nam

Note 1) Since the total list of crimes is 267 pages, the first and the last page of each account shall be printed out, and the total list of crimes shall be treated as cd.

Note 2) Since the total list of crimes is 613 pages, only the first and the last page of each account shall be printed out, and the total list of crimes shall be treated as cd.