Defendant 1 and seven others

Yellow Jae-dong (prosecutions) and branch offices (public trial)

Attorney Lee Jae-soo et al.

Defendant 1 is punished by a fine of KRW 20,00,000, Defendant 2 is punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000; Defendant 3 is punished by a fine of KRW 10,000; Defendant 4 (Defendant 2) is punished by a fine of KRW 10,00,00; Defendant 5 is punished by a fine of KRW 4,00,000; Defendant 6 is punished by a fine of KRW 2,00,00,000; Defendant 7 (Defendant 3) is punished by a fine of KRW 15,00,000; Defendant 8 is punished by a fine of KRW 5,00,00,00.

Where Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 4 (Defendant 2), Defendant 5, Defendant 6, and Defendant 7 (Defendant 3) fail to pay each of the above fines, the above Defendants shall be confined to each of the above Defendants in the workhouse for the period calculated by converting KRW 100,000 into one day.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of the above sentence against Defendant 3 shall be suspended.

Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 4 (Defendant 2), Defendant 5, Defendant 6, Defendant 7 (Defendant 3), and Defendant 8 Co., Ltd. order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fines.

Seized evidence Nos. 7, 9, 18, 19, 29, 41, 48, 51, 67, 68, 75 shall be forfeited from the Defendants.

Acquittal of Defendant 1’s violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.

【Institution of Sanctions】

Defendant 3 is the head of the ○○○ Gas station in Suwon-si ( Address 1 omitted), who is in charge of operating the said gas station at the same time, and Defendant 4 (Defendant 2) is the head of the site office of the Nonindicted Company 1 who was subcontracted the “marine Construction Work” of the “Large-si Construction Work 1, 2,” and Defendant 5 is the head of the site office of the said Nonindicted Company 1 who was subcontracted the “YY 1, 2,” and Defendant 6 is the head of the site office of the said Nonindicted Company 1 who was subcontracted the “YY 1, 2,” and Defendant 7 (Defendant 2: 3) is in charge of executing the construction fund, and Defendant 7 (the head of the public service division of the Nonindicted Company 1, who was subcontracted the “YY 1, 2, 3,” the “YY 1, 3, who was subcontracted the “YY 1, 3, and is in charge of controlling the affairs of the said construction company.”

【Criminal Facts】

1. Joint crimes committed by Defendants 3 and 4 (Defendant 2);

On April 2013, Defendant 4 (Defendant 2: Defendant 2) had been working as the site manager of Nonindicted Co. 1, the victimized company that was responsible for subcontracting the portion of the “marine Construction Project” among the “Maritime Construction Project Nos. 1 and 2” at the above ○○ Gas station’s office. The Defendants prepared a trade statement stating the volume of oil that is less than the amount of oil actually supplied at the construction site, and conspired to obtain the oil price by claiming it from Nonindicted Co. 1, the victimized company.

피고인 3은 위 공모내용에 따라 2013. 5. 5. 위 ○○주유소에서 실제로는 위 공사현장에 유류를 공급하지 않았음에도 불구하고 ① 2013. 4. 5. 크레인(차량번호 1 생략)에 경유 384ℓ, ② 2013. 4. 9. 크레인(차량번호 2 생략)에 경유 25ℓ, ③ 2013. 4. 9. 통선(☆☆ ☆호)에 경유 800ℓ, ④ 2013. 4. 19. 크레인(차량번호 2 생략)에 경유 46ℓ, ⑤ 2013. 4. 19. 통선(☆☆ ☆호)에 경유 600ℓ 합계 1,855ℓ의 경유(시가 합계 3,213,852원)를 공급한 것처럼 허위의 ‘2013년 4월분 유류 거래명세서’를 작성하여 피고인 4(2심:피고인 2)에게 건네주었고, 피고인 4(2심:피고인 2)는 위와 같은 허위의 유류 거래명세서를 피해회사에 제출하였다.

The Defendants received money equivalent to KRW 3,213,852 as oil price from the victimized company on May 31, 2013, as well as the amount of money equivalent to KRW 3,213,852 from November 5, 2013 (attached Form 1 - Defendant 4 (Defendant 2: Defendant 2) and Defendant 3’s crime list) from the victimized company, and acquired by deception the money equivalent to KRW 54,518,330 in total six times as above, as stated in the list from November 5, 2013.

2. Joint criminal conduct by Defendants 3 and 5

On April 2013, the Defendants used that Defendant 4 (Defendant 2: Defendant 2) had been working as the site manager of Nonindicted Co. 1, a victimized company, in charge of subcontracted construction works among the “Toping 1 and 2 Construction Project” in the above ○○○ Gas station’s office, and attempted to prepare a false statement of transaction, stating the fact that the oil was supplied to an individual vehicle used for construction business and construction site, and to acquire the oil price by claiming the victimized Nonindicted Co. 1, a victimized company.

On June 5, 2013, Defendant 3, in fact at the above ○○ Gas station, provided a false statement of oil trading (349,440 won on May 2013) as if Defendant 3 supplied 208 liter (vehicle number 5 omitted) via a string vehicle (vehicle number 3 omitted and vehicle number 4 omitted) on four occasions, and Defendant 5 submitted the above false statement of oil trading to Defendant 5, while Defendant 5 submitted the above false statement of oil trading to the damaged company.

The Defendants, as described above, obtained an amount equivalent to KRW 349,440 as oil price from the victimized Company on July 1, 2013, as well as an amount of money equivalent to KRW 349,440 from November 5, 2013 (attached Form 2-, Defendant 5, and Defendant 3’s crime list) from November 5, 2013.

3. Joint criminal conduct by Defendants 3 and 6

At the end of May 2013, the Defendants prepared a false statement of transaction, stating as if they supplied oil to an individual vehicle for business purposes and a construction equipment used at the construction site, using Defendant 6, as the director of the public service division of Nonindicted Company 1, the injured company in charge of subcontracting with respect to “YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

On August 5, 2013, Defendant 3: (a) in fact supplied 301 liter via Defendant 6’s personal vehicle (vehicle number 6 omitted) six times in accordance with the above public offering; (b) provided 302 liter (530,010 won in July 2013) via 302 liter (vehicle number 11 omitted) at the construction site; and (c) provided Defendant 6 with a false statement of oil trading in July 2013; and (d) Defendant 6 submitted the aforementioned false statement of oil trading to the damaged company.

The Defendants, as described above, obtained an amount equivalent to KRW 530,010 as oil price from the victimized Company on August 16, 2013, as well as an amount of money equivalent to KRW 530,010 from November 5, 2013 (attached Form 3 - Defendant 6 and Defendant 3’s list of crimes) from November 5, 2013.

4. Joint offenses committed by Defendants 3 and 7 (Defendant 3);

From September 201, the Defendants used that Defendant 7 (Defendant 3) had overall control over the construction work of Nonindicted Company 2 as the managing director of Nonindicted Company 2, who subcontracted the “large LNG production base construction work,” at the above ○○○○ basin office (hereinafter “Defendant 2”) around September 201, the Defendants prepared a false statement of transaction, stating that the oil was supplied to the construction vehicles and construction equipment used in the construction site, despite having supplied the oil to the private vehicles, and conspired to acquire the oil price by receiving a claim from Nonindicted Company 2, the victimized Company.

Defendant 3, on November 10, 201, in fact at the above ○○ Gas station, in accordance with the above public offering, provided a 103-liter (200,654 won) via the upper public power plant, which is a construction site construction equipment, to Defendant 7 (2: Defendant 3) with a false statement of oil trading in October 201, and Defendant 7 (Defendant 3) submitted the above false statement of oil trading to the damaged company, although Defendant 3 supplied 103-liter (200,654 won) with a 103-liter (200,654 won) on three occasions at the site of construction site.

The Defendants received money equivalent to KRW 200,654 as oil price from the victimized company on December 14, 201, as well as the amount of money equivalent to KRW 200,654 from November 10, 201. From this point to November 10, 2013, the Defendants acquired money in total 73,985,852 won through 19 times in total, as described above, as stated in [Attachment 4-7 (Defendant 3) and Defendant 3 crime list] from November 2013.

5. Defendant 1

Although no one is allowed to manufacture, import, store, transport, keep, or sell fake petroleum products, the Defendant, at around 13:45 on November 2, 2013, he/she manufactured fake petroleum products by mixing them with oil storage tanks (one unit: 2,00 square meters, 1,000 square meters, 2:2:8 square meters, and 1,000 square meters, respectively) installed in loading a motor vehicle in his/her possession (vehicle number 10 omitted) at the ○○ Oil station, and at the same time, he/she manufactured fake petroleum products by mixing them with oil storage tanks (2,00 square meters, 1,000 square meters, 2:8 square meters, from June 18, 2012 to November 12, 2013 (attached Table 5- Defendant 1’s daily list) by the aforementioned method as stated in [Attachment Table 727,297, 213, 2529, 2948, 298

6. Defendant 2

Although no one is allowed to manufacture, import, store, transport, keep, or sell fake petroleum products, the Defendant made a mixture of fake petroleum products (hereinafter referred to as “fluort oil”: 2,00 liter, 1,000 liter, 1,000 liter) at the ○○ gas station on October 25, 2013, which is installed in loading 600 liter and other oil 2,719 liter via a vehicle number of the Defendant owned by the Defendant at the ○○ gas station, at the same time, at a fuel storage tank (one 2,00 liter, one 1,000 liter, one 2:8), and from July 20, 2012 to November 6, 2013 (attached Form 7 - Defendant 2 daily list) at the same method as written in [Attachment 7 - Defendant 189,578,125 liter, 315 liter, etc.

7. Defendant 3

The Defendant is a person who actually operates a petroleum retail company of Defendant 8.

(a) Violation of the Harbor Transport Business Act;

항만운송관련사업을 하려는 자는 항만별·업종별로 해양수산부령으로 정하는 바에 따라, 지방해양항만청장에게 등록하여야 함에도 불구하고, 피고인은 지방해양항만청장에게 선박급유업을 등록하지 않고 2013. 10. 24. 10:30경 삼척시 (주소 2 생략)에 있는 호산항에서 피고인이 운영하는 ○○주유소 이동판매차량(차량번호 8 생략)을 이용하여 ◁◁◁호(5.56톤, 통선)의 운항에 필요한 선박용 연료유(경유) 400ℓ를 공급한 것을 비롯하여, 2011. 9. 1.경부터 2013. 10. 30.까지 [별지 8 - 항만운송사업법위반 범죄일람표] 기재와 같이 △△호, □□□호, ◇◇호, ☆☆ ☆호, ▽▽호, ◎◎◎◎◎호, ◁◁◁호, ▷▷호 등에 총 73회에 걸쳐 호산항에서 합계 93,156ℓ의 경유를 선박의 연료유로 공급하였다.

(b) Violation of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act;

1) No person shall sell petroleum products for the purpose of making them manufacture or use fake petroleum products.

Although Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 had been well aware of the fact that fake petroleum products are being mainly supplied to vehicles by mixing them with diesel oil, the Defendant sold 50 liters (867,50 won) and 2,515 liters (3,34,950 won) via transit to Defendant 1 at the ○○ Oil station around June 18, 2012, and sold 67,515 liters (3,34,950 won) from around that time to November 12, 2013 (attached Form 9-16,875,338 won (attached Table 9-3 petroleum product retail list) in total over 215 times, including 916,875,338 won (e.g., transit 205,817,653 won, 711,057,685 won), 67,651,641,659,529,949, etc.

2) No petroleum retailer shall sell light oil as fuel for automobiles under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Automobile Management Act and vehicles and household appliances prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Nevertheless, even though Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 had been well aware of the fact that he used light oil as fuel for a vehicle for the purpose of saving fuel, the Defendant sold 1,40 liter (1,568,00 won) of light oil to Defendant 1 at the ○○○ Oil station on January 11, 201, as well as the sale of 1,40 liter (1,568,00 won) of light oil to Defendant 1, Defendant 2 from around that time until November 9, 2013 (attached Form 10 - the list of crimes of oil sale by Defendant 3, etc.). In addition, Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 sold 273,115 liter (i.e., a total of KRW 361,09,640 won) as fuel for the vehicle.

(c) Violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act;

A person liable to prepare and issue a tax invoice pursuant to the Value-Added Tax Act shall not issue a tax invoice with a false entry. However, the Defendant issued to Defendant 1 a false entry of the tax invoice in around April 30, 2012, the amount of oil equivalent to KRW 25,242,00 (18,030 liter) from April 1, 2012 to April 30, 2012, but supplied to Defendant 1 an oil amounting to KRW 37,766,20 [one tax invoice amounting to KRW 26,50,00 among the auxiliary auxiliary components operated by Defendant 1 and one tax invoice amounting to KRW 11,26,200 and one tax invoice amounting to KRW 15,20,00, and one tax invoice amounting to KRW 35,50,000 shall be divided into two separate tax invoices, and the issuance of the false tax invoice amounting to KRW 37,766,50,005].

8. Defendant 8 Company

(a) Violation of the Harbor Transport Business Act;

The defendant 3, who is the employee of the defendant at the time and place specified in paragraph 7(a)(3), supplied light oil to the administrator of a regional maritime affairs and port office without registering the ship oil supply business as fuel oil of the ship, as described in paragraph 7(a).

(b) Violation of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act;

1) At the time and place specified in Article 7-2(b)(1), Defendant 3, an employee of the Defendant, sold petroleum products for the purpose of manufacturing and using them as fake petroleum products, as described in Article 7-2(b)(1).

2) At the time and place specified in Article 7-2(b)(2), Defendant 3, an employee of the Defendant, sold a light oil as described in Article 7-2(b)(2) as fuel for the vehicle.

(c) Violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act;

Defendant 3, who is an employee of the Defendant at the time and place specified in paragraph 7(c)(3), issued a tax invoice stating false matters as described in paragraph 7(c)(3).

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Second written protocol of interrogation of Nonindicted 16 prepared by the police

1. Each police protocol on Nonindicted 34, Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 6, Nonindicted 7, Nonindicted 8, Nonindicted 9, Nonindicted 10, Nonindicted 11, and Nonindicted 12

1. The statement of Nonindicted 13

1. Non-Indicted 1, Gangwon-do Office, Non-Indicted 2's charge of manufacturing and selling fake petroleum products, Non-Indicted 2's name on-site photographs (5 pages of investigation records), CCTVs (98 pages of investigation records), investigation reports [Confirmation of methods of entry of secret books by Non-Indicted 3, Non-Indicted 1, Non-Indicted 2, Non-Indicted 3, Non-Indicted 2, Non-Indicted 4, Non-Indicted 6, Non-Indicted 2, Non-Indicted 6, Non-Indicted 4, Non-Indicted 6, Non-Indicted 2, Non-Indicted 4, Non-Indicted 6, Non-Indicted 2, Non-Indicted 4, Non-Indicted 2, Non-Indicted 7, Non-Indicted 4, Non-Indicted 1, and Non-Indicted 4, Non-Indicted 6, Non-Indicted 2, and Non-Indicted 2, Non-Indicted 3's request to report on the use of petroleum products at the scene of investigation (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant 1, Non-Indicted 2, etc. 3, Defendant 2, report on criminal investigation information and payment]

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

○ Defendant 1 and Defendant 2: Each of the subparagraphs 3 and 2 of Article 44 and Article 29(1)1 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act, and the choice of each fine

○ Defendant 3: Articles 347(1) and 30(Fraud) of each Criminal Act; Articles 30 subparag. 2 and 26-3(1) (the point of a non-registered harbor transport-related business); Articles 44 subparag. 3 and 29(1)3 (the point of a sale of petroleum products for the purpose of manufacturing fake petroleum products) of each of the Harbor Transport Business Act; Articles 46 subparag. 10 and 39(1)7 (the point of selling light oil as fuel for a vehicle); Articles 10(1)1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (the point of issuing a false tax invoice); Articles 10(1)1 of each of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (the point of issuing a false tax invoice);

○ Defendant 4 (the second instance court: Defendant 2), Defendant 5, Defendant 6, Defendant 7 (the second instance court: Defendant 3): Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; Selection of a fine and fine

○ Defendant 8 Co., Ltd.: Articles 33, 30 subparag. 2, 26-3(1) (a) of the Harbor Transport Business Act; Articles 48, 44 subparag. 3, and 29(1)3 (a) of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (a sales of petroleum products for the purpose of manufacturing fake petroleum products); Articles 48, 46 subparag. 10, and 39(1)7 (a) of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (a sales of light oil as fuel for vehicles); Articles 18 and 10(1)1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (a issuance of a false tax invoice)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Defendants: former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 4 (Defendant 2), Defendant 5, Defendant 6, and Defendant 7 (Defendant 3): Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant 3: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Confiscation;

Defendants: Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 4 (Defendant 2), Defendant 5, Defendant 6, Defendant 7 (Defendant 3) and Defendant 8: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 4 (Defendant 2), Defendant 5, Defendant 6, Defendant 7 (Defendant 3), and Defendant 8 corporation

In the case of Defendants 1 and 2, the purpose of manufacturing fake petroleum products is not to sell them to others, but to use them for the same kind of criminal records, and in the case of Defendants 4 (the second instance court: Defendant 2), 5, 6, and 7 (the second instance court: Defendant 3), the victim did not want punishment against the Defendants by mutual consent with the victim of fraud, and the victim used a significant portion of the acquired amount for the purpose related to the business of the victim, such as site operation expenses, etc. In the case of Defendant 8, the punishment shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the circumstances indicated in the crime of this case, including the following: (a) the purpose of manufacturing fake petroleum products is not to sell to others; and (b) there is no same criminal records; and (c) the process of each crime of Defendant 3, the representative director.

2. Defendant 3

(a) Basic crimes;

○ Scope of applicable sentences: Imprisonment for not more than 15 years;

○ Scope of recommended sentencing guidelines

[Determination of Punishment] Fraudulent Crime Group, General Fraud, Type 2 above KRW 100 million, below KRW 500 million

[Special Mitigation] Ad hoc Inspector

[Scope of Decision and Decision of Recommendation Area] Reduction Area: October-2, 196

[Disposition of Concurrent Crimes] 6 and 2/3 [3 months = 3 and 1/3 months = 10 months x 1/3]-2 years and 6 months

(b) Mass crimes: Punishment of Tax Evaders;

[Determination of Punishment] Tax Offenses, Receipt of General Tax Invoices, etc., less than 3 billion won in Type 1

[Scope of Decision and Decision of Recommendation Area] Basic Area: June-1

(c) Handling multiple crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 years and 2/3 years (=2 years and 6 months + 6 months + 1 year).

0 Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months; two years of suspended sentence;

The first offender is committing a crime that reflects his mistake and does not repeat again through confinement life. The victims do not want punishment against the defendant by mutual consent with the victims of the crime of fraud, taking into account the following circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct, family relationship of the defendant, the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, and the progress thereafter, the punishment as ordered shall be determined.

1. Summary of the facts charged

피고인 1은 ‘공소외 15 합자회사’와 ‘◈◈중기(2012. 7.경 이후에는 ’♡♡♡♡‘으로 상호로 운영함)’를 운영하고 있는 사람으로서 피고인 3과 통정하여 2012. 4. 30.경 ○○주유소 사무실에서 사실은 피고인 3으로부터 2012. 4. 1.경부터 2012. 4. 30.경까지 25,242,000원(18,030ℓ) 상당의 유류를 공급받았음에도 마치 37,766,200원 상당의 유류를 공급받은 것처럼{◈◈중기에 26,500,000원 상당의 세금계산서 1부 및 공소외 15 합자회사에 11,266,200원 상당의 세금계산서 1부를 각각 나누어서 발급받는 방법} 세금계산서 2부를 허위로 기재하여 발급받은 것을 비롯하여, 이때부터 2013. 10. 31.경까지 [별지 6 - 허위세금계산서 관련 범죄일람표] 기재와 같이 실제 공급한 유류보다 345,051,370원 상당을 부풀린 합계 1,195,565,053원 상당의 허위세금계산서 38장을 발급받았다.

2. Determination

The facts charged are crimes falling under Article 10(2)1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, and Article 15(3) of the Procedure for the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act provides that if a person who received a notice of payment equivalent to a fine from the head of a tax office complies with the notice, he/she shall not be punished again for the same case.

On April 10, 2014, Defendant 1 received a notification from the director of the three-dimensional tax office on a fine amounting to KRW 15,684,140, and paid the amount equivalent to the fine pursuant to the above notification on the 18th of the same month. Since the above provision recognizes the validity corresponding to the final and conclusive judgment on the payment of the amount equivalent to the fine pursuant to the above notification, Defendant 1 ultimately made a judgment of acquittal pursuant to Article 326 subparag. 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act because the above facts charged constitute a final and conclusive judgment (see Supreme Court Decisions 85Do2664, Feb. 25, 1986; 2001Do849, Nov. 22, 2002).

On April 7, 2014, according to the accusation by the head of Samj District Tax Office, the prosecutor issued the above disposition on the 10th of the same month after the institution of the public prosecution, even though he/she did not have any authority to take any measure with respect to the tax offense, and thereafter, he/she asserts that such disposition is invalid since it is a disposition by an unauthorized person and its defect is serious and obvious and invalid.

The Act on the Procedure for the Punishment of Tax Evaders provides that the kinds of dispositions in relation to a tax offense case shall be subject to a notification disposition, accusation or non-suspect. If the head of a tax office obtains positive evidence of a tax offense, he/she shall, after making a notification disposition, file a complaint in the event he/she fails to comply with such notification within 15 days from the date on which the person subject to such disposition is served, and if he/she is judged to be punishable by imprisonment in light of the circumstances, he/she shall immediately file a complaint; and if he/she complies with such statutory requirements, such as a case where he/she is deemed to be punished by imprisonment, he/she shall not file a complaint after the lapse of 15 days, and if he/she complies with such notification prior to the prosecution, the statute of limitations shall cease to run against such notification disposition.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

[Attachment]

Judges Calopic