logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.10.20 2016고단1807
사기등
Text

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

However, the execution of imprisonment for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Around January 23, 2014, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The victim B’s children prepared for the National Intelligence Service appointment test” with the knowledge that the victim B’s children prepared for the National Intelligence Service appointment test, and the victim was supported by the third Vice Minister of the National Intelligence Service and the head of the personnel division at that time, the Defendant employed the son at the National Intelligence Service only on the face of her own.”

However, the defendant did not have any kind of relationship with the third Deputy Director of the NIS, and even if he received money from the victim, he did not have any intent or ability to appoint the victims to the National Intelligence Service.

The Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received money and valuables under the pretext of inducing or arranging the case or affairs handled by the public officials at the same time when he delivers 20 million won in cash to the victim’s position.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes entered in the accusation and the police statement concerning B;

1. Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense; Article 111(1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution ( Taking into account the fact that he/she commits an error and remittances KRW 20 million to the victim);

1. Probation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act (The possibility of re-offending in light of the criminal records of the accused);

1. Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act;

arrow