2020 Fraud 183

Kim (tentative name) South 70.Woo

Residential Ulsan

Kim Jong-sung (Court Prosecution) and Kim Young-young (Court trial)

Attorney Lee* (Korean National Assembly)

June 12, 2020

Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of one million won. If the Defendant does not pay the above fine, the Defendant shall be confined to the head of the Nowon Station for the period calculated by converting the amount of one million won into the amount of one day.

To issue an order to pay an amount equivalent to the above fine.

Facts of crime

피고인 은 2013. 8.30. ○○화재에 홀인원 비용 특별약관이 포함된 '무배당 ○○화재 운전 보험 ◎◎◎◎ '보험 에 가입한 사람이다.

The above special agreement provides that if the insured has a man during the golf game, he/she compensates for the amount required to cover the expenses for the elderly person (the expenses for purchasing souvenirs for the purpose of increase of capacity, the expenses for congratulations, and the expenses for congratulations) within the limit of the purchase amount of insurance under the special terms and conditions. On September 25, 2015, the defendant submitted a claim for the payment of the insurance money and the compensation for the fire to the defendant corporation on October 22, 2015 after using the same amount as the insurance money and the compensation for the fire to the defendant corporation on December 14, 2015, in the Dongsanc located in Busan on September 25, 2015.

그러나 , 사실 피고인은 위 보험사에 제출한 카드명세서 3,000,000원(□□ 사용분)과 2,000,000 원 ( ■■ 사용분)을 승인 즉시 취소하여 사실상 홀인원 기념 만찬 및 물품 을 구입 한 사실 이 없어위 비용에 대해서는 보험금 청구를 하여서는 아니됨에도 불구하고 마치 홀인원 기념 비용으로 물품을 구입하거나 축하만찬비로 사용한 것처럼 보험금을 청구 하였다.

Defendant was paid KRW 5,00,000 from ○ Fire Co., Ltd. on November 5, 2015 as compensation for the expenses for commemorative expenses for the elderly on November 5, 2015. Accordingly, Defendant was granted property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement

1. Investigative reports (Attachment of Data);

The defendant and his defense counsel argued that there was no intention of fraud since they received insurance money as soon as possible and submitted a revoked card statement as stated in the decision in the idea that they will use the cost for the elderly person. Since they later used the money of making the insurance money as the cost for the elderly person Eul, the defendant and his defense counsel argued that there was no intention of fraud.

However, the Defendant’s claim for insurance proceeds is an act of causing mistake to the insurance company due to a false credit card specification, which is a false credit card specification, and the Defendant was well aware that it was a false credit card specification. Therefore, it is difficult to view that the act of submitting a receipt cancelled in the claim for insurance proceeds constitutes an act that can be acceptable as a means of exercise of rights by social norms). Accordingly, the Defendant and the defense counsel’s claim for insurance proceeds is rejected. The application of the law is without merit.

1. Relevant legal provisions and selection of punishment on the facts of crime;

Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act; Selection of fines

1. Invitation in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act that issues an order for provisional payment;

Reasons for sentencing

The fact that the victim did not agree with the victim or did not pay damage is disadvantageous, but the fact that the defendant had actual neglected personnel in the golf game in the judgment of the defendant, and that there is no record of being punished for the same kind of crime, etc. In addition, the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, occupation, motive and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. are determined as the sentence like the order, taking into account the circumstances of the imposed conditions in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, occupation, motive and consequence of the crime.

Judges Jeong Jong-soo