A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

On August 14, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor of two years and six months at the Ulsan District Court for the crime of occupational embezzlement, and the judgment was finalized on December 12, 2009.

The Defendant is a certified tax accountant who operates a “C office” in Ulsan-gu B.

In fact, the victim D, who was donated on June 13, 2007 by his father, sold a 88m2, G 77m2, and the 3m2 above-ground buildings in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-gu, which was donated on June 13, 2007 by his father, to the existence of this public disclosure company, the redevelopment company, had the intent or ability to have the victim be exempted from gift tax and transfer tax, but had no intent or ability to have the victim be exempted from gift tax and transfer tax.

1. Around August 31, 2007, the Defendant made a false statement that “The amount of taxes to be paid is one billion won or more” to the victim at the above tax accountant office. B, upon delegation of the gift tax and transfer tax return, the Defendant appears to reduce the amount of taxes to the extent that it does not conflict with the law. The Defendant made a false statement that “The amount of taxes to be paid shall be reduced to the extent that it does not go against the law.”

The Defendant, by deceiving the victim as such, received KRW 30 million from the victim’s account in the name of the Defendant to the Agricultural Cooperative Account under the same day.

2. On September 3, 2007, the Defendant made a false statement by phone call to the victim at a place unclaimed place, stating that “The amount less than 30 million won should be reduced.”

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was transferred from the victim to the national bank account in the name of the Defendant on the same day.

3. On October 2007, the Defendant made a false statement that “The Defendant called 25 billion won as a recompense for the reduction of KRW 200 million so that transfer income tax may be less than KRW 200,000,000,” by phoneing to the victim at a place not lower than a patrolman.”

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was issued a cashier’s check of KRW 25 million on the same day by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Of the police suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant.