(영문) 부산지방법원 2013.4.26.선고 2013고합21 판결

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six years and by a fine not exceeding 600,000,000 won. If the Defendant fails to pay the above fine, the Defendant shall be confined in the workhouse for the period calculated by converting 5,00,000 won into one day.

540,000,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

It shall issue an order to pay the amount equivalent to the above fine and the amount of the additional collection.

Reasons

Criminal History Office

From August 16, 2005 to January 28, 2010, the Defendant became a member of the Bank on March 1, 1990, and served as a vice-director at the headquarters of the Bank from August 16, 2005 to January 28, 201. The Defendant became aware that the Defendant was an outstanding customer who deposited the amount of money equivalent to the deposit at the headquarters of the Bank.

C 'B' operated the above company and acquired the dividend to investors by receiving and receiving the payment of investment money, and agreed to pay the total amount of investment or the amount exceeding it without obtaining authorization, registration, reporting, etc. in the future without obtaining authorization, permission, registration, etc., and under the circumstances under which it would be bound by the investigation of the act of fund-raising in the future. On October 2008, 'C' was sent to C' by withdrawing corporate funds with a certificate of deposit or check to 'C', and 'C' by ordering 'C', the money laundering to be used in exchange for cash or small amount of check.

1. Around February 2009, the 200 million won-receivingC ordered 'C' to enter 'C' out of the corporate funds of 'C, such as 'C' into a negotiable certificate of deposit 1,796,766,685 won in total, and C' requested 'C' to exchange the above negotiable certificates of deposit with the Defendant in the vicinity of the Hy Bank's S Bank's Dozary Branch and 'C' to exchange them with checks, etc. to ensure that the source of funds is not traced.

The Defendant entered the last holder of Chapter 9 of the above certificate of deposit as C, and even though he was C, the third person as the last holder, and exchanged KRW 1796,766,685 in the face value of 9 certificate of deposit as KRW 1,800 in the face value check. On February 23, 2009, the Defendant issued KRW 1,800 won in the vicinity of the B Bank reductiondong Branch, and received KRW 1,800,000 in the face value of 1,80,000 won in the face value of 1,80,000 won in the face value of B Bank's face value, and received KRW 20,000 in the exchange of the certificate of deposit from C as the face value of 1,00,000 won in the face value of 1,000 won in the face value of B Bank.

2. The 300 million won acceptanceC instructs 'C' on March 2009 to exchange 7 billion won withdrawn from the funds of a corporation, such as C, with one million won check, etc. so as not to track the funds, and 'C' to exchange 'C' according to the order above.

On March 16, 2009, the defendant requested to exchange 100,000 won check with 50,000 won per face value of 140,000 won per face value and 1,000,000 won per face value.

The Defendant, despite the fact that the last holder of the said check was C, C, the last holder of the said check was endorsed as the last holder, and then exchanged for KRW 1 billion in KRW 1 billion in KRW 1,000 in KRW 5,00 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 30,00 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 10,000 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 10,00 in KRW 5,00 in KRW 7,00 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 1,00 in KRW 1,00 in the face value of KRW 5,00 in KRW 3,00 in the face value of KRW 30,00 in the face value of KRW C.

3. On April 7, 2009, the “C” directed Defendant C’s “Defendant C” to exchange approximately KRW 2.9 billion in cash out of the 1 million check exchanged as described in paragraph 2, and “C” to the Defendant in the vicinity of the 2000,000 Won of the 200,000 Won of the 200,000 Won of the 200,000 Won of the 200,000 Won of the 200,000 Won of the 200,000 Won of the 200,000 Won of the 200,000.

On April 8, 2009, the Defendant, along with E, exchanged the above check in cash while attending a branch of the Busan Han River Bank. The Defendant, around April 8, 2009, was given KRW 1.398 billion in cash to “C” in the vicinity of the branch of the B bank located in the Busan Seo-gu, Busan, and received KRW 30 million in cash at the price of exchanging the check in cash.

4. On April 14, 2009, the “C” directed Defendant C’s “Defendant C” to exchange approximately KRW 2.9 billion in cash out of the original check exchanged as described in paragraph 2, and “C” requested the Defendant to exchange the number of KRW 1.499 billion in cash in the vicinity of the main office of B Bank Party reduction on April 14, 2009.

On April 14, 2009, the Defendant, along with E, exchanged the above check in cash while going through a branch of the Busan Han River Bank. On April 14, 2009, the Defendant was issued KRW 1.49 billion in cash to “C at an apartment parking lot of H 00, Nam-dong, Busan, and then received KRW 10 million in return for exchange of the check in cash.

5. The Defendant, an employee of a financial company, etc., received money and valuables totaling KRW 540,000,000 through four times in connection with his/her duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of "C" (p. 1, 3, 4, and 5 times);

1. Statement to the prosecution of I;

1. Each police statement to E and J;

1. Investigative reports by prosecutors (report on attachment to suspect personnel records cards);

Application of Statutes

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

Article 5 (4) 1, (1), and (5) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (amended by Act No. 9646 of May 8, 2009; hereinafter the same shall apply), Article 42 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 10259 of April 15, 2010; hereinafter the same shall apply) (generally, the selection of limited imprisonment and the imposition of necessary fines)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 and 6 of the Criminal Act (Consideration favorable to the rear)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

Article 10 (3) and (2) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes

1. Order of provisional payment;

Reasons for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act [Scope of Punishment] Imprisonment of 5 years to 7 years, fine of 540,000,000 to 1,350,000 won [Scope of Punishment of Recommendation]

○ Determination: Securities crimes, financial crimes, the acceptance or intermediation of officers and employees of financial institutions, 50 million won or more (type 6)

○ General Convicts

- Mitigation elements: No criminal records;

○ Scope of Recommendations: Imprisonment of up to 12 years (basic areas)

[Pronouncement of Punishment] The crime of this case in 6 years of imprisonment and 600,000 won of fine is giving or receiving money or valuables in connection with the duties of the defendant, who is an employee of a financial institution. The above crime of this case is likely to seriously undermine the sound economic order by significantly undermining the public confidence in the integrity of officers and employees of financial institutions and the non-purchase of their duties. The amount of money acquired by the defendant by the crime of this case reaches KRW 540,000,000,000, which is a large amount of money to be used for compensating for the damaged investors by the act of fund-raising, such as C, etc., even if the defendant is well aware of it, and there is no return of the received money, it is necessary to punish the defendant strictly.

However, there is no record of criminal punishment, support for wife and two children, the crime of this case is not directly related to the business of the financial institution, and it seems not to cause substantial damage to the financial institution, although the defendant escaped after the arrest warrant was issued in the course of investigation, even though the defendant escaped after the arrest warrant was issued in the course of investigation.

Voluntary appearance, the upper limit of imprisonment under the former Criminal Code, which was enforced at the time of the instant crime, was 15 years, etc., shall be favorable circumstances, and the punishment shall be determined lower than the lower limit of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines in consideration of various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments in this case, such as the age, character and conduct of the accused