2012 Highest 2031 Computer, etc. Fraud (Partially Accepted Crime Name Fraud)

1. A;

2. B

3. C.

Yellow-time (prosecution) and new-time (public trial)

Attorney D (for the defendant A)

Attorney E (Defendant B)

Law Firm F, Attorney G (Defendant C)

January 4, 2013

Defendant A and B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, and Defendant C by imprisonment for eight months.

Criminal facts

around February 8, 2002, Defendant A was appointed as the president of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives (hereinafter referred to as the “IF”) located in H of Changwon-si, and was in charge of planning, general affairs, auditing, etc. throughout the cooperative and was in charge of overall management of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives. Defendant B was in charge of the overall management of the Livestock Industry Cooperatives from September 30, 2002 to February 27, 2010. From February 28, 2010 to February 27, 2012, Defendant C was in charge of the IF’s credit consultation business, economic business, etc., Defendant C was in charge of the IFF’s loan from February 1, 2008 to February 12, 2008 to February 208, Defendant C was in charge of the overall management of the livestock industry at the rate of 30 billion won or more due to an IFFFF’s loan from around 208 to February 31, 2008.

Defendant A, Defendant B, the president of the partnership, Defendant B, and Defendant C, the credit secretary, at the livestock cooperative office on December 2, 2008 and January 1, 2009, at the meeting of the executive officers held as first patrolmen without the customer’s consent, decided to implement a plan to increase the loan interest [Provided, That at the meeting of the executive officers held as first patrolmen on January 1, 2009, J, who was issued as credit secretary on January 1, 2009, attended the meeting on behalf of Defendant C] by raising the additional interest without the customer’s consent.

Accordingly, on January 22, 2009, the director of the livestock consultation credit division directed K to implement the above discussions with each branch credit staff L, M, N,0, P as the principal office. The above N et al., "if a problem occurs in the Republic of Korea, only the person in charge would be responsible for it, and it would be changed to the board of directors' decision." On January 22, 2009, the Defendants held the board of directors and the Risk Management Committee in order at the Livestock Cooperatives' Office and confirmed the method of raising the additional interest without the consent of customers, and instructed each branch to implement the plan.

Accordingly, around February 28, 2009, at the office of the IFFF credit department, the Corporation adjusted the interest rate of KRW 1,231,134 from the victim R's loan account by means of inputting the interest rate of KRW 2.6% higher than that of the victim's loan account without the above victim's consent and unfairly acquired the amount of KRW 1,231,134 from the victim's loan account at the victim's computer terminal, and the employees in charge of the IF's head office and five points (OF branch, HF branch, JF branch, MF branch, MF branch, and MF branch) from February 1, 2009 to December 31, 201, 3600 from the IFF credit office and the above five offices to the 836 victim's loan account without the victim's consent to the additional interest rate of KRW 1,231,38,000 from the IFF credit office or five offices.

As a result, the Defendants conspired with the above credit affairsJ, K of the credit division, and the above five branch heads, etc., and obtained the information processing by entering an unlawful order into a computer or other information processing device from February 1, 2009 to December 31, 201, or by receiving direct counter collection from victims, the Defendants acquired the money of KRW 1,603,323,128 from the victims.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the Defendants, K, and J

1. Each police suspect examination report to T, U, V, M, Q, Q, X, Y, Z, AA, AB, AC, L, N, P,O, AE, AF, AH, and AJ;

1. Statement of the police statement to AK;

1. Each report on investigation;

Application of Statutes

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

Defendants: Articles 347-2 and 30 of the Criminal Act / [the point of fraud by use of computers, etc. (the part of receipt of excess interest by automatic transfer), choice of imprisonment] Articles 347(2) and (1), 30 of the Criminal Act / [the point of fraud (the part of receipt of excess interest by automatic transfer), choice of imprisonment]

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The Defendants: (a) the reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act are as follows: (b) the Defendants recognized the instant facts charged and reflect their mistakes; (c) the Defendants did not have any particular criminal power; (d) the total amount of damage was returned through the stable cooperation after the commencement of the investigation; and (e) a considerable number of victims wanting to dismiss the Defendants’ wife may be considered as favorable circumstances to the Defendants.

However, the instant crime was committed in a financial institution based on the existence of the customer’s trust, and rather, it is highly likely to criticize the financial institution’s interest by strengthening the customer’s trust and deceiving the officers and employees. The instant crime was planned and organized, and the instant crime was continued for a long time from February 2009 to December 201, as well as voluntarily during the period of time.

However, in light of the fact that the victim did not have been sentenced to 836 persons and that the amount of fraud exceeds 1.6 billion won, the sentence shall be imposed on the defendants who led the crime of this case. The degree of the defendants' participation and all the circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing in the public trial of this case shall be taken into account, and the punishment against the defendants shall be determined as ordered.

Judges Lee Jae-won