2016Gohap564 Violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act

2016Gohap673(combined) Fraud

2016Gohap755(combined) Acceptance of Misappropriation

2016Gohap871(combined)

2017 Gohap 32(combined)

A

Kim Yong-open, slives, lectures, Kim Jae-at (prosecutions), and clinical rules (trials)

Attorney B

July 7, 2017

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

85 million won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Criminal facts

The defendant is a person who has served as a standing vice-chairperson in the C Trade Union from May 2010 to May 2013.

1. 2016Gohap564 - Violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act

On November 19, 2012, the Defendant was detained on charges of taking property in breach of trust in relation to the receipt of money and valuables from some of the members of the above union in return for the extension of the retirement age. After hearing the talk that the amount of taking property in breach of trust is continuously increasing from the F, a subordinate employee of the E, the Defendant was able to receive money and valuables from G, the wife of the E, under the pretext of investigation.

On December 12, 2012, the Defendant issued KRW 60 million in cash to G through F within the Defendant’s car parked on the front side located in Busan Dong-gu, Busan, for the purpose of requesting the relevant investigation agency to prevent any increase in the amount of property in breach of trust in G at the coffee shop located in Busan Dong-gu. The Defendant received KRW 60 million in cash from G on January 11, 2013.

As a result, the defendant received money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation or good offices concerning cases or affairs handled by public officials.

2. 2016 Gohap673 - Fraud

On May 2013, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim K, “on the street in front of the CF’s office, the Defendant would have been employed by the CF to work for the CF at four high-ranking car in the face of KRW 20 million to KRW 30 million.” However, even if the Defendant had already retired from the CF and received money from the victim, the Defendant had no intention or ability to have the victim employed the CF to work for the CF.

The Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim, received cash amounting to KRW 23 million in front of the above office around May 14, 2013 from the victim, and acquired it by deception around May 14, 2013.

3. "2016 Man-755, - Fraud

(a) Fraud against victims L;

Around January 19, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim L, “ACF, i.e., a cash of KRW 30 million, to be employed in the office of the CF. However, even if the Defendant already retired from the CFF and received money from the victim on May 2013, the Defendant thought to use the money for gambling and did not have the intent or ability to have the victim employed the CFF to work for the CF.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained cash KRW 30 million from the victim, i.e., the victim, and acquired it by deception.

(b) Fraud against the victim M;

Around March 21, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim M as “on the part of the Plaintiff, who is a cash of KRW 30 million, to be employed in the office of the CF.” However, even if the Defendant already retired from the CF and received money from the victim on May 2013, 2013, the Defendant was thought to use the money for gambling, and there was no intention or ability to have the victim employed the CF to work for the CF.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained cash KRW 30 million from the victim, i.e., the victim, and acquired it by deception.

4. "2016 Highis871" - Property in breach of trust.

From May 2010 to May 2013, the Defendant, while working as a full-time vice-chairperson at a C trade union, was in charge of assisting the chairperson in exercising overall control over the affairs of the said union, such as new appointment and transfer of union members, appointment and dismissal of the head of a branch

On April 1, 2013, the Defendant received KRW 25 million in cash as requested by S to find employment of QR S on the road in front of the above partnership office located in Busan East-gu P through QR (S) or a car, which was stopped on the road of the above partnership office in Busan-gu P, and received the delivery of KRW 25 million.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired property in exchange for illegal solicitation in relation to his duties.

5. "2017 Gohap324 - Fraud

Around 19:00 on August 13, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim V at the U hotel coffee shop located in Busan Seo-gu T, stating that “The Defendant would have a worker employed 35 million won or 4 million won to the C Trade Union.” However, even if the Defendant had already retired from the C Trade Union on May 2013 and received money from the victim, the Defendant had no intention or ability to have the victim’s relative or 4s employed to the C Trade Union.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained cash 20 million won from the victim, that is, he obtained from the victim.

Summary of Evidence

2016Gohap564

1. Statement of the accused in the first protocol of trial;

1. F statement among the interrogation protocol of the second interrogation of the defendant against the defendant

1. Each police statement of the F, E, and G;

1. Investigation report (E’s wife G and telephone call statement);

1. Investigation report (investigation of the period of reduction of the victim E);

1. Report on investigation (verification of the FJ scene of the crime), guidance, and photographing of the place of crime;

1. A report on investigation (verification, date and time confirmation, etc. of the E), a report on personal confinement, and two copies of a written judgment;

1. Three presidents of ordinary loans, full certificates of registered matters, and detailed statements of transactions;

1. Statement of the accused in the second protocol of trial;

1. The police statement of K;

1. Complaint;

1. A certificate;

2016Gohap755

1. Statement of the accused in the third protocol of trial;

1. Each police statement of M/W;

1. Complaint;

1. Investigation report (the date, time, and place of the crime in the case to be accused);

1. Investigation report (the change of the date and time of the crime in question which is a criminal complaint);

1. Statement of transactions by account;

1. A photograph of the amount of damage, 2016,0871;

1. Statement of the accused in the fourth protocol of trial;

1. The police statement of S;

1. Complaint;

1. Investigation report (the details of telephone communications between the complainants);

1. A criminal investigation report (limited to C Management Organization), C Management Organization map;

1. A criminal investigation report (attached data), or a copy of a bankbook;

1. The summary of the organization of the CF and the bylaws 2017, 324;

1. Statement of the accused in the fifth trial records;

1. Partial statement of witness V;

1. Part of the police statement concerning V;

1. Complaint;

1. Investigation report (attaching a written opinion on a case forwarded);

Application of Statutes

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

Article 111(1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act (the receipt of money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation, the choice of imprisonment), Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (Fraud), Article 357(1) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 14178, May 29, 2016; hereinafter referred to as the "former Criminal Act"); Article 357(1) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 14178, May 29, 201); 1.

The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the severe penalty and penalty)

1. Additional collection:

(a) A violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act: The latter part of Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act (the amount collected in addition to 60 million won);

(b) Crimes of taking property in breach of trust: Reasons for sentencing Article 357(3) of the former Criminal Act (additional collection amounting to KRW 25 million); 1. Scope of punishment in law: From January to 15 years;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Each fraud;

[Extent of Recommendation] Basic Field 2 (at least KRW 100,000, less than KRW 500,000)

*The descriptive Criteria: Where the one-stage increase in the type (special mitigation) as a result of adding up the same competition, has not been punished or has been recovered from a considerable part of damage; / Where a crime was committed repeatedly for an unspecified or unspecified number of victims or repeatedly for a considerable period of time.

(b) Violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act;

[Extent of Recommendation] Basic Field 3 (at least 50 million won, less than 100 million won) of Acceptance of Money and Valuables under the pretext of solicitation and good offices

(1) Between 1 and 2 years)

【Special Convicted Person】

(c) Misappropriation;

【Scope of Recommendation】

Type 1 (less than KRW 30 million) and the basic area (from April to October) of violation of trust.

【Special Convicted Person】

(d) Scope of recommendations based on the standards for handling multiple crimes: From one year to June 10, 100 (=4 years + June 1/2 + October 10 + 1/3).

3. Determination of sentence;

○○ Unfavorable Normals: The Defendant received KRW 25 million under the pretext of employment solicitation in the position of the full-time Vice-Chairperson of the CF and received KRW 60 million under the pretext of solicitation for employment, and in solicitation to an investigation agency, by deceiving four victims even after retirement from the full-time Vice-Chairperson of the CFF, and acquired KRW 13 million in total under the pretext of employment solicitation. In light of the background, method, amount of damage, etc. of the crime, there is a high possibility of criticism in light of the circumstances, method, amount of damage, etc., part of the crime of this case was committed during the period of probation, the Defendant was committed during the period of probation, there was a previous offense of taking property in breach of trust, and the Defendant was nominated and transferred by part

The circumstances favorable to ○: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of all of the instant crimes and reflects his mistake; (b) the victims of each of the instant fraud do not want to be punished by the Defendant; and (c) the Defendant does not have any criminal conviction.

Part of innocence - Part of frauds against victim V (2017 Height32)

1. Summary of the facts charged

The Defendant made a false statement to the victim V on the date and time, place, as indicated in the criminal facts stated in paragraph (5) of the crime stated in the judgment, that “The Defendant would have a relative or branch of the victim to be employed by the CF. However, on May 2013, even if the Defendant had already retired from the CF and received money from the victim, he/she had no intent or ability to have the victim employed the relative or branch of the victim to the CF. The Defendant had by deceiving the victim as above and received KRW 35 million from the victim.

2. Defendant's assertion;

Although the defendant has received KRW 20 million from the victim, he/she has not received the excess amount.

3. Determination

In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, it is difficult to view that the evidence produced by the prosecutor alone received money exceeding KRW 20 million from the victim at the above date, time, and place, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

1) On October 5, 2015, the victim stated that “20 million won was stated in the complaint which was first submitted on October 5, 2015,” but on October 12, 2015, the victim stated that “35 million won was stated in the police investigation conducted on October 12, 2015,” and that “30 million won was paid in this court,” and “35 million won was not accurately memoryd,” and that “35 million won was paid.” It is not consistent with the statement.

2) The victim stated to the effect that "the victim's statement was 30 million won in this court for the reasons why he reversed the statement on the amount of damage" was 30 million won in this court. "The defendant stated the amount of damage to the complaint amount as 20 million won due to mistake," and "the victim was 20 million won first from the date when the crime of this case was committed, and the defendant demanded money, which was 20 million won first in advance, so that there was an error in the process of filing a complaint." However, the above complaint stated to the effect that "the defendant was working as an executive of the C Trade Union around the beginning of August 2015, and the defendant was employed for three times in 2015 and demanded 35 million won in cash to be paid by the victim, and the victim's statement to the effect that it is difficult for the victim to specifically make the statement to the effect that it was 100 million won in cash."

3) From the end of September 2015, X also stated to the effect that “A victim would promptly return 20 million won to himself/herself,” and the victim stated to the effect that “A victim would return 20 million won to himself/herself even after the complaint.”

4. Conclusion, this part of the facts charged does not constitute a case where there is no evidence of a crime with regard to the part of the damaged amount exceeding KRW 20 million, and thus, a not-guilty verdict should be rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, as long as it is found guilty of a crime of fraud as stated in paragraph (5) of the judgment in relation to

Judges and judges of the presiding judge;

Judges Park Jong-jin

Judges Lee Jin