2012 Highest 1917 (Separation) Fraud

A person shall be appointed.

Last Address: Toynsan-gu Pl. S. S. 4-gil (Service by Public Notice)

Reference domicile, Jinan-gun, Jinan-gun

Kim Jae-ho (Lawsuits) and Cho Young-ju (Trial)

July 6, 2016

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Criminal facts

The defendant was trying to use money for personal purposes without knowing the officers and employees of modern automobiles and modern middle industry factories, even if he received money from the victim B for the purpose of operating expenses, so there was no intention or ability to employ the victim's deceptive C, D in modern automobiles and modern middle industry factories.

1. Fraud on July 20, 2010

On July 15, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim B who wants to find a fraudulent employment in E office operated by the Defendant, a non-profit organization, a non-profit organization operated by the Defendant in Dasan-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-gu

In addition, on July 17, 2010, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The curriculum would be prepared” to the victim B from the F restaurant located in the Hensan-gu Full-time Automatic.

On July 20, 2010, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) obtained money from the victim on the part of the victim for employment expenses from the victim; and (c) obtained money from the victim via the former bank account (Account Number: 000 - 00 - 000000) in the name of G, the Defendant, as the Defendant, from the victim; and (d) obtained money from the victim.

2. Fraud on September 17, 2010

On September 17, 2010, the defendant, in the above F restaurant, the defendant, who wants to find a fraudulent D employment, "In the above F restaurant, the defendant was found to be a full-time worker because of the same day of modern car's sales, which is the same as that of modern car's sales, and then became a part of the military modern Chinese Heavy Industries. The defendant made a false statement to the effect that one person would be "(30 million won) at the expense of further reduction."

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained three copies of the cashier’s checks of KRW 10 million on the same day under the pretext of employment expenses from the victim and acquired money from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statements made by witnesses B in the second protocol of the trial;

1. Statements made by witnesses H and I in the third protocol of the trial;

1. Statement of the witness J's partial statement in the fourth trial record (excluding the part in which part of the witness's statement is not trusted);

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant (including the part of J, H, B's statement)

1. Statement to the prosecution by J;

1. Each police statement made to B, H, J, and I

1. A complaint;

1. A detailed statement of entry and withdrawal transactions;

1. Investigation report (to submit a record or a cell phone call record);

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts;

Article 347(1) of the Criminal Code, each choice of imprisonment

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

Reasons for conviction

The victim is the state that he paid the defendant a total of KRW 60 million under the name of the request for employment by fraudulent parties, and the defendant claims that the victim paid the above money to the defendant in order to help the defendant who has difficulties in showing the intention of entering and developing the site owned by the K K Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "K") and the defendant's statement is a question of whether there is credibility of the victim's statement despite the defendant's above assertion.

According to the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the victim's statement is reliable. It is recognized that the victim paid KRW 60 million to the defendant in order to request the employment of the fraudulent act, not to develop K Construction.

1) On July 2010, the victim came to know of the Defendant through the introduction of H, who was employed as an employee in the Defendant’s operation E (Evidence No. 26 of the Evidence No. 2010). At the time, the victim was aware of the operation of F, C and D, a temporary worker, and expressed that the victim would receive H through L. The victim was aware of the operation of F. H. Around July 2010. The victim was able to introduce the Defendant to the victim while the Defendant, who was aware of the victim, was a pregnant employee.

2) H made a statement to the effect that “If the Defendant is aware of the directors, factory heads, and members of the Labor Relations Commission of the Hyundai Motor Vehicle in his salary-gu, and if he is able to find employment in the modern vehicle, H introduced the victim. Therefore, the victim was stated in the investigative agency and court (Evidence No. 129 pages, No. 149 pages).

3) Since July 13, 2010 and July 15, 2010, the victim asked the Defendant to find a fraudulent employment, and the Defendant reached the market within five minutes at the time when the Defendant was inside the market. The Defendant was aware of the victim while making a statement, such as “I are inside the modern executive.”

4) On July 20, 2010, the victim transferred KRW 30 million to the Defendant or the Defendant’s private money account (the victim’s statement received the above account from anyone at the time was partially reversed from the investigative agency and the court) by Ma or H, which had been in a private relationship with the Defendant or the Defendant, at the time of the Defendant’s transfer of KRW 30 million (the credibility of the statement that the victim transferred the above money to anyone at the time of the time of the transfer cannot be viewed as having been lost, and the victim’s statement that the victim transferred the said money to anyone at the time of the above transfer cannot be viewed as having been lost on the back of the statement).

5) The victim continued to meet the Defendant, M, and H, and came to know how they were employed by the Defendant, and how they were employed by the Defendant (M also states that there is little material that the Defendant had been employed by the Defendant in the military. The evidence record No. 131). Around that time, the Defendant or the Defendant became aware of the J, which was separate from the Defendant, to arrange employment for modern automobiles or those of modern Heavy Industries.

6) The J, with the knowledge that the victim ought to be aware of the employment of the Defendant in the modern automobiles or modern Heavy Industries through the Defendant, had the victim employed the Defendant by going through the P, which was the head of the Working Group for the World Heavy Industries subordinate to which he was aware, and had the victim employed the Defendant by finding employment.

7) In this process, J demanded 4 million won as P’s personnel assistance to the victim, and the victim had already given 30 million won to the defendant for employment assistance, and the victim called 'the victim would receive 30 million won from the money', and the defendant made 'the defendant called 'the last 187, 188, 500 won in the evidence record,' which 'the defendant would make 'the last 187, 188, 500 won in the face of 'the last 30 million won in the face of the money' (which can not be seen as being said 'the defendant made the above statements on the premise that 's defendant also received 30 million won as an employment assistance).

8) On July 2010, J: (a) around September 2010, the victim’s first fraudulent C; (b) around September 201 of the same year, the victim’s second fraudulent D was allowed to arrange for employment; (c) during the said process, C, etc., which the victim gave to the Defendant around July 2010, received from the Defendant’s side to P, a working group leader of the subcontractor; and (d) the Defendant had already received and kept the curriculum of C, etc. at the time of receiving money from the victim; (c) the Defendant had already received and kept the curriculum of C, etc. at the time of receiving money from the victim; and (d) the record of evidence was sent to J. 189 pages, 558 pages, and (d) the witness J’s legal statement at the request of the Defendant around July 20, 2010; and (d) made a statement to the Defendant’s record of evidence.

19) The victim already ordered 60 million won to the defendant, but requested the J to offer a fraudulent job referral and sent 5.5 million won to the Working Group leader (Evidence No. 33). It appears to be due to the fact that the victim, who is difficult to be employed as a regular worker from the defendant, is more favorable for the subcontractor to work for a certain period of time at the subordinate company. In addition, it seems that the victim's fraud, who is difficult to be employed in the modern automobile, etc. through the regular process, did not follow the above several orders in order to meet the qualification requirements.

10) According to the Defendant’s assertion, as to the fact that the victim gave the above money in relation to the purchase and development of the K Construction Site, the Health Board, first of all, the Defendant’s actual delivery of R, which is the real owner of the K Construction Site, is around August 28, 2010, when the victim gave the first money to the Defendant (Evidence No. 404 pages), and according to R’s statement, R said that the victim did not reach the victim before reaching the Defendant. In other words, around July 20, 2010, the victim and R did not reach the Defendant’s statement 0.0 billion won or 0.0 billion won as the witness’s first statement to the Defendant (Evidence No. 1, 2000 won or 0.0 won as the witness’s first statement to the Defendant).

11) The defendant also received the so-called "land sale and development power" from R on October 4, 2010. This is a result of the defendant's preparation of R at the request of the construction business operator for development, etc., and "if the sale is not made, it shall be null and void" (which means 96 pages of evidence record). The defendant's assertion that the victim paid money to the defendant in order to get the above letter of delegation is also difficult to believe.

12) The Defendant made a statement to the effect that he/she is trying to identify C’s employment without being cut off from the content of telephone dialogue with the victim’s fraud C, which was made from March 201. (Evidence No. 46 pages (Evidence No. 46 of the record also acknowledges that the Defendant made the above dialogue). If the Defendant did not receive the request for employment referral, it is not necessary to conduct the above dialogue (the Defendant made the above dialogue upon the request of the injured party, but there are reasons for the victim to request the above dialogue. However, since it is not visible, there is no evidence to deem that the victim made the above request).

13) According to the evidence records, the defendant and J, M, and J et al. do not seem to have received money in relation to employment from a third party, such as taking a payment of KRW 50 million, or KRW 40 million, from a third party, and taking part in the same, and returning the money (Evidence Record 350 pages, 358 pages, 369 pages, 559 pages, 566).

14) On July 20, 2010, the victim paid KRW 30 million for the first time on July 20, 2010, but the defendant paid KRW 30 million in addition to around September 17, 2010, that there was a defect that there was two regular jobs in the modern Heavy Industries, not modern automobiles. The defendant paid KRW 30 million to a large enterprise, such as Hyundai Motor, etc., that would arrange employment as a regular worker at the beginning of this year, while he paid KRW 30 million in the Defendant’s deception that he would arrange employment as a regular worker, it does not seem that the defendant’s act of paying KRW 30 million in addition due to the defendant’s new deceptive act does not seem to be an exceptional case.

15) Ultimately, the victim paid a total of KRW 60 million to the defendant for the purpose of mediation by fraud, not for the development title of the K Construction Site, and the witness J, which may have been said to have participated in the job mediation by the defendant together with the defendant, has partially reversed the defendant's statement on the first time of delivery by the defendant and R (the evidence record 502 pages), the J's statement on the amount of money paid by the defendant in relation to employment (the evidence record 501 pages, 559 pages), or the statement on the amount of money paid by the defendant himself/herself (the evidence record 501 pages, 559 pages), or even if the victim partially reversed the defendant's statement on the process of receiving the account number of KRW 0 from the defendant, it is difficult to dismiss all the credibility of the victim, H, R's statement and the remainder of the statement by the J and it is more reliable.

Comprehensively taking account of each of the above evidence and the remaining evidences, the facts charged of this case can be sufficiently convicted.

Reasons for sentencing

The punishment shall be determined as per the order, taking into consideration all the matters including the crime of this case, the nature of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime, the damage was not completely recovered, the defendant's occupation, age, character and conduct, criminal records, etc., such as the method of deceiving the victim, the process of receiving money.

Judges Demotion