Defendant

Rule of Public Rule

Law Firm Jeong, Attorneys Park Sung-chul et al.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

The Defendant, in collusion with, in order to subscribe to, and establish a corporation that does not actually engage in business by raising funds, obtains a large quantity of bills from the issuing bank of the current account by issuing and settling bills and certificates of shares as if there are normal business performance, such as collecting false tax invoices, etc., and issues and distributes the “bill of Maritime Affairs” under the name of a person who is to trade at a certain price and is expected to be defaulted on the date of payment, even though there is no transaction.

Around September 2009, the Defendant, in collusion with influences, established a non-indicted 1 corporation, a company that issues the pre-determined bill on the date of payment.

The Defendant, from September 2009 to March 2010, opened a current account at the shipping crossing point of the Gyeongnam Bank, issued promissory note 368 copies, total face value 26,212,462,787 won, and sold to 2 million won to 3 million won or more per head through sales books.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with the false names, engaged in the short-term financial business without obtaining authorization from the Financial Services Commission, thereby violating the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act.

1. The entry of part of the public offering by the defendant in the first trial records;

1. A protocol of examination of part of the defendant by prosecution;

1. Details of the non-indicted 1 corporation’s default bills

1. Details of the deposit account in the name of Nonindicted Co. 1 and Defendant

1. Details of non-indicted 1’s non-indicted 1’s shipping substitute bills

1. Data received from the Eastern Customs Service;

1. Two separate evidence records;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 44 subparag. 22, 360(1) and 30 of the former Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (Act No. 9784), Article 44 subparag. 22, and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Selection of punishment;

Imprisonment Selection

The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that promissory notes issued by the defendant in the course of operating Smarket of the trade name of non-indicted 1 corporation were delivered to non-indicted 2 for the purpose of discount for self-financial circulation, and that there was no fact that the non-indicted 1 corporation issued and distributed the "band-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cor-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-cand-c)".

Considering the fact that the defendant is a criminal defendant and is not enough to repent, that there is confusion in the market economy order by distributing illegal checks exceeding 26 billion won in the market, etc., it is difficult to avoid severe punishment. Provided, That it is difficult to take into account the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant seems to have lived faithfully without any specific criminal punishment, except for punishment imposed before the long time, considering the motive, means and result of the crime of this case, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, criminal records, criminal records, and circumstances after the crime of this case, etc., and the punishment of this case shall be determined as per the disposition.

Judges Kim Tae-ok