Defendant 1 and three others

Defendants

Jink

Attorneys Im Woo-hee et al.

Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2005Gohap201 Delivered on November 4, 2005

The guilty portion of the judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant 1, 2, and 3 shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months.

The number of days of detention before a judgment of the court below is rendered shall be 139 days per defendant 1, 4 days per defendant 2, and 140 days per defendant 3, respectively.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of the above punishment against Defendant 2 shall be suspended.

10,000,000 won shall be additionally collected from Defendant 3.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, Defendant 1’s fraud against Nonindicted 3, Defendant 1’s fraud against Nonindicted 4, Defendant 1’s fraud, and Defendant 1, Defendant 2, and Defendant 4’s acquittal, respectively.

Of the litigation costs, one-third of the part concerning non-indicted 1’s witness at the original trial and the trial court’s own expense of the defendant 1, 2, and 3, the part concerning non-indicted 5, and 6’s witness at the expense of the defendant 1, and the part concerning the public defender for the defendant 2, and 3 at the trial of the party, shall be borne by the defendant 2 and 3.

1. Scope of trial by a party member against Defendant 1 and 4;

Of the facts charged in the instant case against the above Defendants, the lower court acquitted the Defendants as to the fraud against the victim Nonindicted 7, and convicted the rest of the guilty part, and filed an appeal against the conviction part, but it became final and conclusive as it did not file an appeal from both parties. As such, the scope of judgment against the above Defendants is limited to the conviction part among the judgment of the lower court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles

The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or by misapprehending legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(1) Defendant 1 (hereinafter “Defendant”).

(A) Each fraud in paragraphs 1, 2, 3-A, (c), and (1) of the judgment of the court below

The defendant, taking into account whether the defendant is in the position of the president of the village reconstruction association of the village village, whether the defendant was the chairperson of the rebuilding promotion committee of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "promotion committee of this case"), the fact that the defendant did not deceiving the victims about the possibility of establishing the association of the reconstruction promotion committee of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "promotion committee of this case"), the fact that the defendant's promise to provide the victims with interest to the reconstruction construction is a condition to suspend the approval of the promotion committee of this case promoted by the defendant. Since the promotion committee of this case did not obtain the authorization of the promotion committee of this case until now, it cannot be objectively confirmed the defendant's intention, the defendant's promise to give the victims the right to remove, design, or enforce the reconstruction association of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "renovation association of this case"). However, the court below acknowledged that the defendant obtained the right to select the company related to the reconstruction construction of this case, and the victim, the victim, the victim, and the 2 of this case by deceiving the victims of this money as stated in its ruling.

(B) Each fraud in Section 4-A of the holding of the court below

The victims do not lend money from the defendant due to a mistake or error as a result of deception on the defendant's ability to repay, but voluntarily lent money to the defendant by creating a connection interest rate with the reconstruction project in mind of the success possibility of the committee of promotion of this case, and it is not recognized that the defendant is a criminal intent to acquire the money. However, the court below acknowledged that the defendant acquired the money by borrowing it as stated in the decision of the court below even though the defendant borrowed money to the victims.

(C) The point of preparing each qualification-based private document in the holding of the court below

The defendant prepared a joint execution contract and a rebuilding execution contract in the qualification of the chairperson of the committee of this case, not as the head of the association, and the defendant was merely the chairperson of the committee of this case, not the head of the reconstruction association, because he was well aware of the circumstances that the defendant was well aware of the fact that he was not the chairperson of the committee of this case. In addition, the defendant did not intend to obtain the qualification of the head of the association, and even though the defendant was not misrepresented or misappropriated, the court below acknowledged that the defendant prepared a joint execution contract and a rebuilding execution

(D) The point of defamation as indicated in the judgment below

Although the Defendant did not recognize the fact that the Defendant was false at the time of committing the crime of defamation as indicated in the judgment below, and did not have any negligence, the lower court recognized that the Defendant, despite being aware that the content of the printed article was false, sent and distributed it to the residents of the Gaman apartment, thereby impairing the victim Nonindicted 8’s reputation.

(2) Defendant 4 (the point of fraud in Paragraph (1) of the original judgment)

The above defendant 1 was unaware of the fact that the defendant 1 had been provided with duplicate monetary support under the same interest right, so it was not possible to notify the victim non-indicted 3. The defendant's monetary support was not made by mistake due to the above defendant and the defendant 1's deception, but it was voluntarily made in order to provide convenience in the process of carrying out design business after the reconstruction association was established, and thus it cannot be said that the above defendant had a criminal intent to deceive the victim or defraud the above defendant. However, the court below acknowledged that the above defendant by deceiving the victim that he would make a design contract in collusion with the defendant 1 and by deceiving the victim to take part in the design business after the reconstruction association was established.

(3) Defendant 2

(A) The 3-A, (c), each fraud in the judgment of the court below

Although the above defendant conspired with the defendant 1 and 3 that he would give the victim non-indicted 1 and 2 the right to execute the reconstruction construction of this case, the court below acknowledged that the above defendant acquired the money from the non-indicted 1 and 2 in collusion with the defendant 1 and 3.

(B) The fact that the preparation of a private document for qualification under the judgment of the court below is made

Although the above Defendant did not have been involved in preparing a joint execution contract and a reconstruction execution contract with Nonindicted 1 and 2, the lower court acknowledged that the above Defendant, in collusion with Defendant 1 and 3, prepared each of the above contracts with the recognition of qualification as the president of the partnership.

B. Unreasonable sentencing (defendants)

In light of the various sentencing conditions of the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

3. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

(1) The fraud of Paragraph (1) in the holding of the court below (Defendant 1, 4)

(A) Summary of the facts charged

In addition to the resolution of the general meeting under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, the business affairs related to reconstruction shall be prescribed as the resolution of the general meeting. For the selection of the business entity, the business entity shall fairly evaluate its capacity and construction amount by means of competitive bidding, etc., and the business entity shall undertake procedures such as going through the resolution of the general meeting of its members. The apartment complex in progress for reconstruction shall have been already established five years from 1997 and competition with the Defendants, and Nonindicted 8 shall be elected as the head of the association at the inaugural general meeting on May 24, 2003. The reconstruction promotion committee before the establishment of the association shall obtain authorization from the Songpa-gu Office on June 12, 2003, and it shall not be authorized to enter into a contract for the selection of the reconstruction association in the name of 30 billion won related to the reconstruction project (the victim shall be deemed to have entered into a contract for the reconstruction project in the name of 100 billion won prior to the conclusion of the contract with himself, which may not be concealedd below.

(B) The judgment of the court below

Based on macro evidence, the lower court found the Defendants guilty of the charges on the following grounds: (a) if Nonindicted 3 knew in advance that the said Defendants would not give money to the said Defendants if they had known that they would have given another person an objection to the reconstruction construction as promised to do so; and (b) based on such finding, the lower court found the Defendants guilty.

(C) Judgment of the court below

However, we cannot accept the above judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

In testimony at the court below and the court of first instance, if the defendant 1 knew that the above non-indicted 10 architect's office was first supported by the non-indicted 10 (hereinafter "non-indicted 10 construction"), the non-indicted 3 stated that the above defendants would not be supported by the above facts charged. However, according to the records, the non-indicted 9 was well aware of the procedures for the reconstruction project as the relation where the non-indicted 2 participated in the reconstruction project, and the non-indicted 5-6 promotion committee was not established for the reconstruction project, but the non-indicted 10's office building's 10 construction work's 6 construction work's 0 construction work's 10 construction work's 6 construction work's 10 construction work's 10 construction work's 6 construction work's 10 construction work's 10 construction work's 6 construction work's 10 construction work's 20 construction work's 10 construction work's 3 construction work's 200 construction work's construction work's 4 construction work'.

In light of the above facts, Non-Indicted 3’s statement in the court of original instance and the court of first instance, it appears that Non-Indicted 3 did not have any particular effect on Defendant 1’s continued financial support to the promotion committee of this case, even if Non-Indicted 3 knew that he had no authority to select the company, etc. as the stage prior to the establishment of the association, he would be able to receive convenience in receiving design services after the establishment of the association. In addition, inasmuch as Non-Indicted 3 entered into a rebuilding design contract with the promotion committee of this case, first of all victims, he thought that he had legal rights in the construction of this case and continued to provide money, and even if Non-Indicted 10 had known that Non-Indicted 3 had provided financial support to the promotion committee of this case, it would not have

Therefore, there is no evidence to believe that part of the statements in the investigation agency, the court below, and the court of the trial that the defendants knew that they received the money by deceiving Non-Indicted 3 and obtained it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the facts charged, the court below found the above facts charged guilty by putting them into a part of Non-Indicted 3's statements without credibility, and there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding facts.

In the end, the appeal by the above defendants pointing this out is with merit.

(2) The fraud of Paragraph (2) in the holding of the court below (Defendant 1)

According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, if the defendant loans KRW 100 million to the victim non-indicted 6, who is the representative director of the 11 architect office, for the purpose of performance guarantee, the above defendant would be able to conclude a design contract for the whole reconstruction construction of this case within one year if the contract is not fulfilled. Non-indicted 12, who was working as an adviser of the committee of promotion of this case, would also invest KRW 50 million, and later make the non-indicted 6 invest the remainder of KRW 50 million, and there was a proposal that the non-indicted 6 would have a profit. Non-indicted 12 would be able to receive the above amount of the defective investment as seen above, and around that time, the non-indicted 6 would have been able to receive 50 million funds from the non-indicted 1's office and the non-indicted 6's office had no experience in executing the reconstruction project, but the defendant could have received the above construction construction contract prior to that time.

In light of the above facts in the court below's statement in the court below's decision, the above defendant had already concluded a provisional contract with another architect office for the design contract of the reconstruction construction of this case and had already been provided with the money, but he would be able to conclude a duplicate design contract with the non-indicted 6 with hiding it, so long as he received the money as above, it shall be sufficiently recognized that he received the money by deceiving the non-indicted 6 and acquired it.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same effect is just, and the above defendant's assertion is without merit.

(3) Article 3-1 (A) Fraud in the holding of the court below (Defendant 1, 2)

According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, Defendant 3 introduced Nonindicted 1 and 2, the representative director of Nonindicted 13 corporation, to Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 at the time of the crime as indicated in the judgment of the court below, and Defendant 2 was bound by Nonindicted 1, and Defendant 1 would be the head of the association because it has already been formed with the members of the association. The consent to establish the association is 4,00 out of 6,60 members of the association, and it is possible to authorize the establishment of the association. The 1 billion won was 5 billion won investment in the 60th anniversary of which the joint execution contract for the reconstruction project was entered into, or was signed, with Defendant 1, under the participation of Defendant 2 and 3, to enter into the reconstruction project, and the 100 million won was not known to Defendant 1 and the 25th of the 5th of the 1st of the 5th of the 1st of the 1st of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 4th of the 20000 receipts.

In light of the above facts, it is sufficiently recognized that Defendant 1, etc. already agreed to give the other person the right of design or removal during the reconstruction construction of this case, but they entered into a joint execution contract including the matters concerning the design and removal of the reconstruction construction of this case, and Defendant 1, etc. conspired with Nonindicted 1, etc. by receiving the said money, and obtained the money by deceiving him.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no reason to discuss the appeal by the defendant 1.

(4) The fraud in Section 3-C (Defendant 1, 2) of the decision of the court below

According to the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the defendant 3 concluded a provisional contract with the victim non-indicted 2 to provide the non-indicted 1 with KRW 500 million as the down payment, including the right to remove the village apartment reconstruction project. The non-indicted 2 concluded a provisional contract with the defendant 2 and 3 with the introduction of the non-indicted 17, but the above defendants 2 and 3 did not receive the right to reconstruct the village apartment reconstruction project (the defendant 695 pages of the investigation record) at the presence of the above defendants 1 and delivered 50 million won to the defendant 1, and the non-indicted 2 did not obtain the above construction work experience prior to the execution of the reconstruction project, and the non-indicted 1 and the non-indicted 2 did not receive the right to reconstruct the reconstruction project from the non-indicted 15, 200,000 won to the non-indicted 2 and the non-indicted 15, 200,000 won to the non-indicted 2.

If Nonindicted 2’s statement in the above facts of recognition appears in the court below and the court of the trial, it is sufficiently recognized that Defendant 1, etc. already concealed to Nonindicted 2 the fact that he agreed to give him the right to remove or implement the reconstruction of this case among the reconstruction of this case and deceiving Nonindicted 2, thereby deceiving him the above KRW 500 million. In this regard, the judgment of the court below which found him guilty of this part of the facts charged is just, and the above assertion by Defendant 1, etc. is without merit.

(5) The preparation of a private document with qualification in Section 3-b, (d), and (2) of the holding of the court below (Defendant 1, 2)

(A) Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below

The court below held that the defendants conspired to receive money from the non-indicted 1 for the purpose of exercising the right and duty as investment money, and concluded a joint implementation contract with the non-indicted 1 at the office of the promotion committee of this case on October 24, 2003, "1. Business name: 479, 479-1, 3. Housing site size: 398,07.30m2: 5. Total floor area of construction: 7,104 units of apartment, 104 units, and 2. 4. 1. 2. 4. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 2. 3's name and seal of the non-indicted 1, the developer of the reconstruction association and the non-indicted 13, the developer of the reconstruction association and the non-indicted 13, the developer of the reconstruction association, to be the non-indicted 4's name and seal attached to the rebuilding association agreement."

(B) Judgment of the court below

However, it is difficult to accept the judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

According to the statement of Nonindicted 1 and 2 in the investigative agency and the court of original instance and each statement of “joint implementation contract for the reconstruction project of the village-based apartment” (the investigation record No. 31 pages) and “the reconstruction implementation contract” (the investigation record No. 695 pages) with Defendant 1, Nonindicted 1 was aware that Nonindicted 8 had already been elected as the head of the association at the inaugural general meeting of May 24, 2003, he was bound by Nonindicted 8 and that Defendant 1 would be the head of the association. The above joint execution contract was prepared in advance and executed by Nonindicted 1 with Defendant 2, and revised the contents thereof in consultation with Defendant 1, and Defendant 1 had already been signed and sealed by Defendant 2 with Defendant 1, who had already been elected by Defendant 1 as the chairman of the reconstruction association, and Defendant 1 had the possibility of signing the reconstruction execution contract with Defendant 2, who had already been elected by Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 as the chairman of the reconstruction association.

According to the above facts, it is difficult to see that Defendant 1 was aware that the completion of each contract was the president of the reconstruction association by pretending that he was the president of the reconstruction association, and there is no other evidence to recognize that Defendant 1 was aware that he was the president of the reconstruction association, and thus, Defendant 1 should be acquitted of this part of the facts charged, but the court below found Defendant 1 guilty of this. In so doing, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts

Therefore, Defendant 1, etc.'s appeal pointing this out is justified.

(6) Article 4-1 (1) 1 of the judgment of the court below (Defendant 1)

(A) Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below

The summary of this part of the facts charged is that Defendant 1, who established a collateral mortgage with the bank's loan and purchased shares of 60,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,0000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won

(B) Judgment of the court below

However, it is difficult to accept the judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

According to the prosecutor's office and the court below's statement, non-indicted 18, the vice president of non-indicted 10, who is the vice president of non-indicted 10, stated that the non-indicted 18 should not lend the above amount if he knew that the non-indicted 10, who was the representative director of the non-indicted 10, would make reimbursement within four months from the date and time limit of the decision of the court below, and reported it to the non-indicted 4, who was the non-indicted 10, and if he knew that the above defendant was receiving money from the non-indicted 9, he would not give the above amount. However, if the non-indicted 19's statement was presented at the court of first instance after legitimate investigation and duly adopted by the court below, the non-indicted 18, who was the vice president of the non-indicted 10, want to receive the above amount under the pretext of operation funds or lending from the re-building-related industry, the non-indicted 2's general practice in the re-building-related industry, and the head of the association's design right to receive 10 billion.

According to the above facts of recognition, the victim expected the case where the above defendant becomes the president of the association and voluntarily lent the money to obtain the right to design of the reconstruction construction of this case by creating a link with the above defendant, and it is difficult to view that the above defendant was guilty of deceiving or deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged.

Therefore, it is difficult to believe that part of the above defendant's statements at the court of the court of the court of the first instance, which seems to correspond to the above facts charged that the above defendant had obtained money by deceiving the victim, received money, and obtained money, and it is insufficient to recognize the above facts charged only with the entries in the statement of Nonindicted 18's preparation, the statement of prosecution document (the prosecutor's statement against Nonindicted 18), and the statement of a monetary lease agreement, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the above facts charged, so the verdict of innocence

Nevertheless, as the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment, and the appeal by the above defendant pointing this out is with merit.

(7) Article 4-1 (1) (2) of the judgment of the court below (Defendant 1)

(A) Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below

The court below found the defendant 1 guilty on May 31, 200, by taking account of the following facts: "The defendant 1, who established a collateral mortgage with the bank's loan and purchased shares of 60,000,000 won (number omitted)-3-3, there are no other properties or incomes from others, and there is no intention or ability to repay the loan normally even after borrowing the money from others, the court below shall complete the loan of 50,000 won to the non-indicted 3 at the office of the promotion committee of this case on May 2002: "The non-indicted 1, who borrowed 50,000 won from the non-indicted 10,000 won to the non-indicted 3's housing bank account (number omitted) with the non-indicted 3's name on May 31, 2002."

(B) Judgment of the court below

However, it is difficult to accept the judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

From October 29, 2001, the victim non-indicted 3, who was before the crime of this case, delivered money to the above defendant from around October 29, 2001 to the defendant for the purpose of receiving convenience in receiving design services of the reconstruction construction of this case, and around March 2002, the fact that the provisional contract was made out between the above defendant and the above defendant. According to the records, the above defendant borrowed money from Non-indicted 3 at the time of borrowing money from the above defendant 3, which he borrowed money to the non-indicted 10,000 won, with the intention of making it possible for the above defendant to pay back money from the non-indicted 10,000 won as stated in the judgment of the court below. Since the above defendant entered into a provisional contract between the above defendant and the above defendant, it can be recognized that the above defendant could have received the reconstruction design contract if the head of the association was the head of the association.

According to the above facts, as long as Nonindicted 3 lent money to the Promotion Committee of this case and concluded a provisional contract in preference to other victims such as construction of Nonindicted 10, it is judged that he had preferential rights, and thus, he voluntarily lent money to the above Defendant for the purpose of maintaining a critical position by subsidizing the borrowed money for construction of Nonindicted 10, and it is difficult to deem that the above Defendant was aware of the victim as stated in the facts charged, or had the intent to commit fraud.

Therefore, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, although it is difficult to believe that the defendant knew that he received the money by deceiving Non-Indicted 3 and received it, and there is no other evidence to prove the above facts charged, and therefore there is no other evidence to prove this part of the facts charged, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, and there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts. The appeal by the above defendant pointing this out is justified.

(8) The fraud in paragraphs (3) through (6) of Article 4-4 of the decision of the court below (Defendant 1)

According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, the defendant 1 introduced the victim non-indicted 5, who is the representative director of the non-indicted 21 corporation through the non-indicted 20 around October 2002, as the head of the reconstruction apartment association, and the non-indicted 5 would have the right to execute the reconstruction project of this case, including the right to remove among the reconstruction project of this case. The defendant 1, as described in paragraph 4-A (3) of the judgment of the court below, was elected as the head of the reconstruction association around January 20, 203, would offer all rights such as the right to execute the reconstruction project of this case, and received 50 million won from the non-indicted 5 to March 8, 2004 as the donation expenses of the apartment residents, and received 50 million won from the non-indicted 204 to the non-indicted 15-5 of the reconstruction project of this case, and continued to implement the reconstruction project of this case as part of the rebuilding project of this case 15.

According to the above facts of recognition, the above defendant already agreed to the other person with the execution right including the matters concerning the design and removal of the reconstruction construction of this case, but deceiving the non-indicted 5 to conclude the same contract with the same contents, so it can be sufficiently recognized that he received the money continuously under the name as stated in the judgment of the court below and acquired it by fraud. In the same purport, the judgment of the court below convicts all the charges of this part of the facts charged is just, and the above defendant's assertion is without merit.

(9) The point of defamation as indicated in the judgment below (Defendant 1)

According to the evidence duly admitted and adopted by the court below, the defendant 1 was aware that the non-indicted 8 did not personally receive or use the money received from the contractor and that there was no threat to the management and disposal without the consent form. The defendant 1 prepared a printed article as stated in the judgment of the court below for the purpose of slandering the non-indicted 8, and sent and distributed it by mail to the non-indicted 6,600 residents of the following apartment. According to the above facts, according to the above facts of recognition, the defendant infringed the honor of the non-indicted 8 by publicly alleging that the above contents are false with the knowledge that they are false.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the above defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is just, and the defendant 1's above assertion is without merit.

B. Sub-committee

Therefore, Defendant 1, 4, and 2’s appeal is partly reasonable, and the reasons for reversal for Defendant 1 and 2 as to the preparation of qualification and qualification documents as stated in the judgment of the court below are common to Co-Defendant 3 who appealed only on the ground of unreasonable sentencing, and therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below which held that the defendants combined with the remaining facts of a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is subject to one punishment cannot be maintained, and the reversal cannot be exempted.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, without deciding on the grounds for appeal on unfair sentencing by the Defendants, the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below is reversed under Articles 364(6) and 364-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is again decided through pleading.

The summary of the facts constituting an offense and the evidence admitted by this court is as shown in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for deletion of the "non-indicted 3 and 18's each legal statement of the witness, the prosecutor's protocol of the non-indicted 3 and 18, the prosecutor's protocol of the non-indicted 3, the prosecutor's protocol of the non-indicted 18, the prosecutor's protocol of the non-indicted 18, the document of the prosecution, the document of the prosecution (the prosecutor's protocol of the non-indicted 18, the document of the non-indicted 18, the document of the non-indicted 18, the document of the non-indicted 3 and the document of the non-indicted 18, the document of the provisional contract of the building, the document of the non-indicted 1, the document of money lease

1. Following the third part of the judgment of the court below in the 16th part of the 3th part of the 3th part of the 16th part of the 3th part of the 3th part of the 3th part of the 3th part of the 16th part of the 3th part of the 3th part of the 3th part of the 3th part of the 16th part

2. Paragraph 1 of Paragraph 2 of the judgment of the court below alters "at the office of the reconstruction promotion committee office located in the above tin village 7 of Section 4 of the judgment of the court below to "at the office of the Seoul Songpa-gu Incheon Metropolitan City tin village 273-3 forest building reconstruction promotion committee's office located in 301 of the forest land reconstruction promotion committee," respectively;

3.Paragraphs 3 to 2, 3-c. paragraphs 2 to 2-b, respectively;

4. paragraphs 4-a. (3) through (6) to 3-a. (1) through (4), and 4-b) to 3-b, respectively;

5. Paragraph 5 shall be replaced by paragraph 4.

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

A. Defendant 1

(1) Fraud against the victim non-indicted 6 in the holding of the court below: Articles 347(1) and 30 (Selection of Imprisonment) of the Criminal Act

(2) Each fraud against the victim non-indicted 1 and 2 in the holding of the court below: Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Article 347 (1) and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(3) Each fraud against the victim non-indicted 5 in the holding of the court below: Article 347 (1) of each Criminal Code (Appointment of imprisonment with prison labor);

(4) Defamation as indicated in the judgment below: Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act (Optional to Imprisonment)

B. Defendant 2

Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Article 347 (1) and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

C. Defendant 3

(1) Each fraud against the victim non-indicted 1 and 2 in the holding of the court below: Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Article 347 (1) and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(2) Acceptance of money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation as stated in the judgment below: Article 111 (Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Aggravation of repeated crimes (Defendant 3);

Article 35 of each Criminal Code [However, the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Code shall apply to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)]

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes (defendants 1, 2, 3);

Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [In the case of defendants 1 and 3, each punishment and circumstances with respect to the defendant 1 and 3 shall be severe, and with respect to the defendant 2, the punishment for each concurrent crime with respect to the victim non-indicted 2 who has been sentenced to a heavier punishment shall be aggravated, as prescribed by the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), and Article 42 of the Criminal Act];

1. Mitigation (Defendant 1, 2, 3);

Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Code. Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Code

1. The number of days pending trial (the defendant 1, 2, 3) prior to the judgment of the court below is included;

Article 57 of the Criminal Code

1. Suspension of execution (Defendant 2);

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (Special Considerations in Benefits Deemed to be Grounds for Determination of Punishment)

1. Collection (Defendant 3);

Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act

1. Bearing the costs of lawsuit (Defendant 1, 2, 3);

Article 191(1) and the main sentence of Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendant 1

The crime of this case committed by the above defendant is inevitable in full view of the following facts: (a) although the defendant purchased an apartment house in progress for reconstruction and acquired the qualification of a member of the reconstruction association; and (b) he is the chairperson of the reconstruction promotion committee who is not the president of the reconstruction association; (c) despite the possibility that he is the president of the reconstruction association; (d) there is an exaggeration that he would be a reconstruction association; and (e) there is a possibility that he would be a reconstruction association; and (e) there is a false fact in the process, thereby deceiving victims, thereby impairing another person's honor by pointing out false facts; and (e) it seems that the purport of the above defendant's establishment of the reconstruction association is to obtain the benefits that the above defendant may obtain at the time of the establishment of the reconstruction association; and (e) even though there is a large amount of money

However, the defendant suffers from the pain due to the urology and the right mouth surgery, etc., and the victim non-indicted 5 agreed with the victim non-indicted 2. The victim's non-indicted 5 wants to punish the defendant. The victims of this case also seems to have been at fault because they suffered from the damage of the right to objection to the reconstruction construction, and other circumstances, which are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, the background of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, shall be sentenced to the same sentence as the order.

2. Defendant 2

Since the above defendant is in the position of adviser of the rebuilding promotion committee, he participated in the fraud crime against the victim non-indicted 1 and 2, and received a certain amount from the defendant 1 as a monthly salary, etc., and the amount of fraud is not large, and the liability for the crime is not less severe because he did not reach an agreement with the non-indicted 1 among the victims.

However, the execution of the sentence is suspended considering various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, the background of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., that the Defendant committed a violation of his or her wrong judgment, and that there was no criminal record prior to the instant crime, and that there was no other conditions of sentencing as indicated in the record.

3. Defendant 3

The crime of this case by the above defendant is an adviser of the rebuilding promotion committee, and was involved in the crime of fraud against the victim non-indicted 1 and 2, and was paid a certain amount under the name of monthly salary, etc. by the defendant 1, in addition to receiving a certain amount from the victim non-indicted 22 under the name of monthly salary, etc., the crime of this case is not good, and the above defendant has been punished several times due to fraud, etc., and the crime of forging securities, etc. is finally committed again within the period of repeated crime after the execution of punishment was completed on October 17, 2002, and the crime of this case was committed again within the period of repeated crime after the execution of punishment was completed on October 17, 202, and the acquired amount was not so much and the crime

However, in light of the fact that the above defendant committed the crime of this case both, and repents his mistake, that the defendant was not punished by the above defendant upon agreement with the victim non-indicted 22, and that the defendant was not punished by the above defendant, and other various circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing of this case as indicated in the records, such as the age, character and conduct of the defendant, the sentence like

Of the facts charged in this case, the summary of the facts charged regarding the fraud against the non-indicted 3 of the victim non-indicted 1 and 4 among the facts charged in this case is as stated in the above 3-A. (1) (A) (A), and the summary of the facts charged in this case as stated in the above 3-A. (1) (c) for the same reasons as stated in the above 3-A. (5) as stated in the above 3-A. (a), the summary of the facts charged in this case as to the facts charged in this 3-4 and non-indicted 3 as stated in the above 3-A. (5) for the same reasons as stated in the above 3-A. (a) (a) and 3-A. (7) for each of the above facts charged as stated in the above 3-A. (a) and the latter part of Article 3-2 (3) (5) of the Criminal Procedure Act for each of the above facts charged as stated in the above 3-A.6 (a) and 7) (a).7).

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

Judges Ko Young-han (Presiding Judge)