(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.12.4.선고 2019고단2938 판결

In the process of carrying out business funds created as a national business gold, the government and the government made an investment in the money to be used for the business expenses, and the government and the government made an investment in the money to explain the direct investors to the business and explain the money to be invested from the third parties and deliver the money received from the investors to the defendant as an interim manager, and the defendant takes charge of the management of the money in general.

Pursuant to the above public offering, around June 20, 2018, at the same place in Busan City, the government and the cost of the government in the form of the old loan and the foreign loan in the name of the government for the business of the government. The government and the government are carrying out the work to take out the funds, and when the funds are taken out, not less than 2 trillion won can be distributed. When investing money in the name of the expenses necessary for the work, the government and the government made a false statement to pay the profits after taking out the funds.

However, there was no entity that carried out the aforementioned business, and around that time, there was no situation in which the business was carried out or was spent for the business expenses. Even if money was received from the victim, some of them thought to be personal consumption, and thus there was no intention or ability to pay the proceeds promised to the victim.

As above, deceiving the victim and deceiving him/her from the victim to his/her account in the name of June 2018, as well as remitting KRW 3 million in the name of the cost of carrying out the business of carrying out the funds from the victim. From August 27, 2013 to January 2019.

11. By no later than the end, six victims were delivered KRW 508,512,00 in total by the same method as the list of crimes in the attached list.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A copy of each police statement concerning each legal statement;

1. Data on the analysis of digital evidence, investigation report (referring to the analysis of suspect's cell phone digital evidence analysis response data), investigation report (the confirmation of specific amount of damage and the crime of fraud by arranging the details of the account);

1. Details of each account transaction and written confirmation of transfer;

[Defendant and defense counsel denies that the defendant did not obtain money from victims in collusion only with personal borrowing of money.

In relation to co-offenders who are jointly engaged in a crime, a conspiracy is not required under the law, but is sufficient when two or more persons agree to realize a crime by jointly processing a crime. Although there is no process of the whole conspiracy, if there is a combination of intent to realize a crime among several persons in a successive or secret manner, a conspiracy is established. However, strict proof is required to acknowledge such conspiracy. However, in a case where a criminal defendant denies a conspiracy, which is a subjective element of a crime, it is inevitable to prove it by means of proving indirect facts or circumstantial facts having considerable relevance in the nature of an object. Of note, what constitutes indirect facts having considerable relevance ought to be reasonably determined based on normal empirical rule by reasonably determining the link of facts by means of considerable observation or analysis (see Supreme Court Decision 2017Do14322, Apr. 19, 2018).

On the other hand, in light of the following facts: (a) as to the instant case, the Defendant described explanation and instruction on the shipping out of the funds under the same name as indicated in its reasoning in the order of the victims, the Defendant was named as the head of the headquarters, and the Defendant was the upper line; (b) the considerable part of the money received from the victims was delivered to the Defendant; (c) there was no document of borrowing; and (d) there was no mentioning the interest on the borrowed money and the due date, etc.; (d) the Defendant and the two occasions were met; (e) the investigation was conducted; and (e) the fact that the Defendant used the title called “Korean team,” called “as soon as the investigation was conducted,” and discussed the direction of response to the investigation, prospect of agreement, and distribution of responsibility, etc., the Defendant may fully recognize the fact that the Defendant acquired money by deceiving

Application of Statutes

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

Articles 347(1) and 30 (Selection of Imprisonment)

Reasons for sentencing

All kinds of sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive, method, and consequence, are considered as follows: a long-term period of crime, the victim is a large amount of damage exceeding KRW 500 million; the defendant does not repent while denying the crime in this case; the damage recovery has not been made; and the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and consequence of the crime

Judges

Judges Ori-hee

Site of separate sheet

A person shall be appointed.

참조조문

-형법 제30조

-형법 제347조 제1항

참조판례

-대법원 2018. 4. 19. 선고 2017도14322 전원합의체 판결

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2019.12.04 2019고단2938

-대구지방법원 경주지원 2017.07.05 2017고단232

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2013.10.25 2013고정390

-서울동부지방법원 2018.08.22 2017고단2692

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2020.02.19 2019고단4122