2017Gohap43 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery)

A

Maximum conversion (prosecution) and stuffing (public trial)

Law Firm (LLC) B

Attorney in charge C

Law Firm D

Attorney E in charge

Law Firm (LLC) F

Attorney G, H, I in charge

May 11, 2017

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of five years and a fine of twenty-seven thousand won.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted into one day.

207,000,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The amount equivalent to the above fine and the additional collection charge shall be ordered to be paid provisionally.

Criminal History Office

1. Status of parties;

The Defendant was employed by the Korea Securities Supervisory Service on June 22, 1989 as an investigative station (Grade IV) with the Korea Securities Supervisory Service on June 22, 1989, and was employed by the Korea Securities Supervisory Service from March 2, 2010 to May 30, 2013 by having been employed by the Korea Securities Supervisory Service in charge of the financial investment sector, etc. and retired on June 30, 2013.

M is a person who, on July 11, 2003, actually operates three companies (0 companies, P and Q companies) listed on KOSDAQ (0 companies, P and Q companies) by acquiring N Co., Ltd. (U.S. listed on KOSDAQ on August 27, 1996, and operating until now.

2. Criminal facts;

At around 209, the Defendant, who was introduced from the branch, had been in a position to assist the listed company in its related business, such as disclosure, application, supervision, etc., because there are many employees at the center of the Financial Supervisory Service. The Defendant used the position of the Financial Supervisory Service, used the position of the Financial Supervisory Service to assist M companies in the operation of M companies and to receive money and valuables in return for arranging M solicitation to other employees of the Financial Supervisory Service.

On January 2010, 2010, the Defendant: (a) at the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Symnae House on Symnadong-dong, M made investments in various military services with the inside money; (b) as such, the Defendant would be able to help the employees in charge, and (c) demanded M companies to pay a certain amount monthly amount of money by taking an attitude to assist the employees in soliciting the Financial Supervisory Service when receiving the inspection or investigation by the Financial Supervisory Service; and (d) M accepted the above demand of the Defendant to the effect that M would properly request the issues related to the Financial Supervisory Service.

(a) Acceptance of money and valuables by means of check cards;

On January 29, 2010, the Defendant received and used the check card connected to the M’s borrowed-name bank account in the name of M, which is the borrowed-name bank account deposited by M, from the time around that time to October, 31, 201, and received KRW 74,00,000 from the sum deposited by M to the above account during the above period as shown in the attached crime list 1, as shown in the attached crime list 1.

(b) Acceptance of cash;

On September 26, 2011, the Defendant received a total of KRW 133,00,000,000 as shown in the attached Table 2 from around the Defendant’s vehicle parked in the Hando-dong Underground Parking Lots of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, including a cash of KRW 50,00,000, from M to June 27, 2013.

As a result, the defendant took advantage of his status and accepted a bribe of 207,000,000 won in total for arranging matters belonging to the duties of other public officials.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Legal statement of the witness M;

1. A copy of the protocol of separate prosecutorial statement against S (second time);

1. Investigation report (report on the details of money and valuables provided to A) - Copy of the payment of the attached business promotion expenses, ‘the receipt of passbook', ‘the receipt of passbook', ‘the cash log' and ‘the details of business promotion expenses for the cash log', ‘an investigation report (the division of the duties of the Financial Supervisory Service), investigative report (the report on confirmation of work experience in the Financial Supervisory Service against A), and data on response to the reduction of the amount of work experience

Application of Statutes

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

Articles 2(1)1, 4(1) and (2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and Article 132 of the Criminal Act (Overallly, Determination of Imprisonment and Imposition of Fines pursuant to Article 2(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 and 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as "reasons for a two-dimensional sentence") take into account the favorable circumstances among the "reasons for a two-dimensional sentence". Meanwhile, in relation to the part in which the defendant submitted a written self-denunciation to an investigative agency twice (the counsel asserts that he/she would surrender himself/herself to the prosecution by telephone before execution of an arrest warrant from his/her written opinion), there is a possibility that the defendant had been aware of the fact that the investigation of the persons concerned or the collection of evidence had already been carried out to a considerable extent; in the self-denunciation letter first submitted, he/she recognized only the part of the card to the prosecution for a certain extent; in the self-denunciation letter submitted, he/she should not separately reduce the part of cash by self-denunciation, taking into account the following factors:

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

Article 134 of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment of five to fifteen years, and fine of 207,00,000 to 517,500,000 won; and

2. The crime of bribery and acceptance of the sentencing criteria (Article 132 of the Criminal Act) is a crime for which the sentencing criteria are not set, and it is reasonable to view that the sentencing criteria do not apply to the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery) due

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment for 5 years and fine of 207,000,000 won; and

【Unfavorable Conditions】

A person working for the Financial Supervisory Service who conducts the inspection, supervision, etc. of financial institutions requires high integrity and morality due to the nature of his/her duties. In particular, the Defendant received a bribe under the pretext of having been working for the Financial Supervisory Service for 20 years and arranging matters belonging to the duties of other employees who may directly or indirectly exercise influence on his/her own, by taking advantage of his/her high class L. The Defendant received a bribe for a long time of approximately three years and six months. The Defendant received a bribe each month for a long period of time, and the amount also exceeds a total of KRW 200 million. The Defendant, instead of receiving money and valuables, did not change to the receipt of money and valuables, and performed an improper act, such as revealing friendship with M, by the team leader of the Financial Supervisory Service who conducted the investigation into M’s market manipulation. Considering that the fairness in the performance of duties by the executives and employees deemed public officials of the Financial Supervisory Service due to the instant crime, it is inevitable to punish the

【Free Circumstances】

However, the Defendant made a confession from an investigative agency to commit the instant crime in depth, and is in contravention of his/her perception of mistake. The Defendant is a primary offender who has no record of criminal punishment in addition to the instant case. It seems that the Defendant had a strong influence on duties that may have been likely to lead to his/her retirement and on other officers and employees. It seems that the Defendant has a family to support the Defendant and is obviously a social relationship.

In full view of all the sentencing factors shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the above circumstances and the age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the defendant, the punishment shall be determined as ordered.

The presiding judge; and

Judges in the order of precedence

Judge Kang Dong-hun

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.