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

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Punishment of the crime

On March 28, 2015, the Defendant performed labor, such as contact, at the manufacturer company E of industrial machinery parts operated by the victim D, and received full reimbursement of KRW 5,490,000,00 in total, as long as the Defendant did not receive after the accident.

Nevertheless, on January 25, 2016, the Defendant issued a seizure and collection order against the victim’s deposit claim based on the title to execute the above fair deed to the Daegu District Court on January 25, 2016, stating that the notary public held the above wage claim as a law firm F. 88, and the principal, interest, execution cost, and KRW 33,167,250 as the claim claim, and issued a seizure and collection order against the victim’s deposit claim on January 27, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and G;

1. Application for a seizure and collection order;

1. The written determination of the seizure and collection order;

1. A process deed;

1. Details of account transfer and account transaction;

1. A copy of the receipt (the defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant applied for the seizure and collection order of the instant claim since the defendant still remains the wage to be received from the injured party.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, in particular, according to the legal statement of the victim and G, the process of preparing and re-issuance of the process certificate, the details and the record of the receipt, etc., the fact that the defendant had received all wages from the damaged person before requesting the seizure and collection order of the instant claim is sufficiently recognized).

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Reasons for sentencing of Article 32(1) and (2) and Article 25(3)3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuit for Dismissal of Application for Compensation (the scope of liability for compensation is unclear, and thus it is not reasonable to issue an order for compensation) [the scope of recommended punishment] general fraud.