2017Gohap899

(a) Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes;

B. Violation of the Foreign Trade Act

(c) Forgery of private documents;

(d) Exercising a falsified investigation document;

(e) Violation of customs law;

1. (a)(c) ; (d) A;

2.(a)(e) B Co., Ltd.

Posi-dong (prosecution) and clinical police officer (public trial)

Law Firm C (For Defendant A)

Attorney D, E

October 25, 2017

Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for two years, and by a fine of KRW 150,00,000,000.

However, with respect to Defendant A, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

11 copies (Evidence 1 through 11), one copy (Evidence 12), one copy (Evidence 12), one copy of overseas/domestic contact address (Evidence 13), one computer file (Evidence 14), one F computer file (Evidence 15), one copy of G name plate (Evidence 16), one copy for foreign exchange bank - one copy for H name plate - one copy for foreign exchange bank - one copy (Evidence 17), one copy of H name plate (Evidence 18), one copy of each A e-mail output (Evidence 19 through 39), one copy (Evidence 19 through 39), one copy of important documents (computer 40), one copy of the statement of transactions (Evidence 41), one copy of the I Hong Kong account (Evidence 41), and one copy 321 (Evidence 42,42, and one copy 43) shall be confiscated (No. 424,000).

61,814,486 won shall be additionally collected from Defendant A.

Defendant A shall be ordered to pay an amount equivalent to the above additional collection charge, and an amount equivalent to the above fine for Defendant B shall be ordered to be paid provisionally by each other.

Criminal facts

1. Defendant A

The defendant is the representative director of the B Co., Ltd., a company importing and selling waste ship in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government J building 602.

(a) Customs Violation - In order to import waste excreta from a foreign country, waste import licenses should be obtained from the Environmental Authority in accordance with the "Act on the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal", and an import declaration should be filed with the Korea Environment Corporation on the premise of the permission.

Nevertheless, although it is impossible for the Defendant to import domestic waste because an overseas exporter located in Singapore, etc. failed to obtain permission from the environmental authority of the exporting country for import of waste, it is not possible to obtain domestic import permission from the domestic environmental office. However, the Defendant had been willing to import waste excreta by using the trade name of an overseas exporter that had obtained permission from the environmental authority at the time of the transfer export and import transaction.

On December 16, 2011, the Defendant, at the office of the above B Co., Ltd., the Defendant, in order to illegally import the amounting to 84,356kg of waste ship, the amount of 68,733 U.S. dollars (78,034,711 won, market price 115,950536 won) of the import declaration price, which was not granted import permission from K of Singapore, by forging the documents for export and import as follows (b), pretended that L in the United States, which had been granted import permission from the Environment Agency, is an exporter of the waste ship at the time of the transfer and import transaction, and filed an import declaration with the customs office under the jurisdiction of the Korea Environment Corporation after obtaining confirmation from the Korea Environment Corporation as to the requirements of the above waste ship, and filed an import declaration for the above waste ship with the importation declaration required by the Korea Environment Corporation until 2016,8,19.

(b) Forgery of private documents and display of private documents;

In order to pretend that the Defendant had obtained permission for import from the Korea Environment Office at the time of the transfer and export transaction as above, the Defendant had expressed mind that he had forged shipping documents, such as the invoice, packing list, etc. of the exporting company, in order to use it as a forged shipping documents.

Accordingly, around March 3, 2014, the Defendant, at the office of the Hong Kong (hereinafter referred to as the “B”) around March 3, 2014, in order to pretend that he imports from G subject to import permission from Hong Kong in the event of export and import transaction prior to the closure, the Defendant forged the invoice and packing statement in the name of G by means of printing out the name plates and seals and seals of G while being kept in the invoice and packing invoice by using a computer for the purpose of exercising the purpose of uttering, and by printing them after sealing them with the name plates and seals of G while being kept in the invoice and packing invoice. On March 26, 2014, the Defendant: (a) forged the invoice and packing statement as above in order to receive the payment of the income amount from closure at the new bank Young-gu branch in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, Young-gu; (b) had an employee who is unaware of the forged fact as if they were a document duly formed; (c) had the agent and the employee under the name of packing in the office of Gangnam-gu, submit the authentic statement of forgery.

From that time until July 12, 2016, the Defendant: (a) forged invoices, etc. over 104 times in the same manner as the list of crimes (2) in attached Form 2; and (b) exercised forged invoices, etc. over 217 times.

(c) A trader in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (property flight to a foreign country) and the Foreign Trade Act shall not manipulate the export or import price of goods, etc. for the purpose of foreign currency flight, and shall not move the property of the Republic of Korea or Korean nationals to a foreign country in violation of Acts and subordinate statutes,

On December 11, 2012, the Defendant intended to manipulate the import price of the closed e-mail imported from foreign enterprises to escape foreign currency. On December 1, 2012, the Defendant changed the unit price of the invoice sent by e-mail from the office of the above B Co., Ltd. to US$800, total amount of 17,791.20, total amount of 17,237.49, respectively. On the same day, the Defendant submitted the invoice changed as above to the branch office of the Young-gu Seoul, Young-gu, Seoul, to the branch office of the Bank, etc. located in the territory of the Republic of Korea in the territory of the Republic of Korea, and remitted US 20,237.495 to the Hong Kong bank account in the name of "T", which was established by the Defendant in the Hong Kong, to the Hong Kong bank account in the name of "T", and transferred the difference between US$17,791.20,000 to the account of the said Hong Kong.

From that time until November 13, 2013, the Defendant, as shown in the annexed List of Crimes (3), applied all 24 times the sum of import prices to 697,435,35.359 on the same method, 753,891.88, thereby escaping from the Republic of Korea 56,456.53 U.S. dollars (Korean 61,814,486 Won) which is the difference.

2. The Defendant Company B was a company that sells waste excreta, and the representative of the Defendant, as described in the above A and paragraph (3) above, unlawfully imported waste excreta, and operated the import price of the waste excreta excessively, and neglected to exercise due care and supervision to prevent the act of flight of property to foreign countries.

A summary of the steam

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. An interrogation protocol of F by prosecution;

1. Statement of the police about P;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. A written accusation;

1. Each e-mail, import declaration statement, seal, letter of credit resolution, statement of credit resolution, statement of relay trade proceeds, statement of remittance, goods, reply to financial transaction information, certificate of import declaration, shipping documents, statement of requirements approval, and waste import permit;

1. Police seizure records;

Application of Statutes

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

Defendant A: Articles 270(2) and 241(1) of the Customs Act; Articles 231 of the Criminal Act; Articles 231 of the Criminal Act; Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act; Articles 231 of the Criminal Act; Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act; Articles 4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (with regard to property flight; property flight); Articles 53(2)9 and 43 of the Foreign Trade Act; Articles 53(2)9 and 43 of the Foreign Trade Act (the manipulation of import price; the choice of imprisonment);

Defendant B Co., Ltd.: Articles 279(1), 270(2), and 241(1) of the Customs Act (illegal revenue), Article 4(4) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (including property flight in a foreign country), Article 57, Article 53(2)9, and Article 43 of the Foreign Trade Act (the manipulation of import price)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendants: The punishment provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, which is the largest penalty, shall be aggravated for concurrent crimes in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (property

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant A: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (General Considerations favorable to the reasons for sentencing below)

1. Confiscation;

Defendant A: Article 48(1)1 and 2 of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

Defendant A: Article 10(3) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes

Calculation of* Collection: 61,814,486 won [the flight amount of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (property flight in a foreign country)]

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendants: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

1. Defendant A

(a) The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one year to 45 years; and

(b) Application of the sentencing criteria (limited to the lowest limit of the recommended punishment based on the sentencing criteria for each private document forgery, on which the sentencing criteria are set, since the sentencing criteria are not set for each violation of customs law, each violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (property flight in a foreign country) and each violation of the Foreign Trade Act in the market);

(i) Class 1 (Forgery of private documents).

[Scope of Recommendation] Type 1 (Forgery, Alteration, etc. of Private Document) as an aggravated area (one year to three years of imprisonment)

[Special Persons] Where a large quantity of documents has been repeatedly published or altered

[General person] Where the benefit obtained by committing a crime or the social and economic harm caused by such benefit is minor, a person who has no record of criminal punishment, a person who has committed a serious reflect, or a false or altered document uses the altered document (Aggravated).

2) Second offence (Uttering of a falsified document)

[Scope of Recommendation] Type 1 (Forgery, Alteration, etc. of Private Document) as an aggravated area (one year to three years of imprisonment)

[Special Persons] Where a large quantity of documents has been repeatedly published or altered

[General person] Where the benefit obtained by committing a crime or the social and economic harm caused by such benefit is minor, a person who has no record of criminal punishment, a person who has committed a serious reflect, or a false or altered document uses the altered document (Aggravated).

* The scope of final sentence due to the aggravation of multiple crimes (the upper limit of crime 1 + the upper limit of crime 1/2): Imprisonment for one year to four years.

(c) Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two years and three years of suspended sentence; and

In order to prevent environmental pollution, etc., the Defendant illegally imported large amounts of waste distribution, in violation of the import procedure of wastes strictly regulated to prevent environmental pollution, and carried out property abroad by manipulating the import price of certain waste distribution margin, and by forging a large number of documents in the process and by exercising forged documents, the quality of the crime is not good. The amount and value of the waste distribution margin illegally imported by the Defendant are disadvantageous to the Defendant. The Defendant recognized both the Defendant’s criminal acts, and is in depth divided into the amount and value of the waste distribution margin illegally imported by the Defendant. The Defendant committed the instant crime in order to normally supply waste distribution in Korea by importing waste distribution margin, the Defendant appears to have caused environmental pollution, etc. due to the Defendant’s criminal acts, and the economic benefits acquired by the Defendant appears to have not been significant due to the instant crime, and the Defendant is a first offender who has no previous criminal record, etc. in favor of the Defendant.

In addition, the defendant's age, occupation, character and conduct, family relationship, the circumstances and results of the crime of this case, and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, shall be comprehensively considered as ordered.

2. Defendant B corporation

(a) Scope of applicable sentences under law: Fines 123,628,972 won 1) to 927,217,290 won 2);

(b) Non-application of the sentencing criteria;

(c) Determination of sentence: Fines of 150 million won;

It is so decided as per Disposition by comprehensively taking into account the various circumstances examined in the grounds for sentencing against Defendant A, the frequency of offenses, the circumstances and results of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, including the circumstances after the crime.

The senior judge of the presiding judge;

Judges Shin Sung-sung

Judges Kim Gin-ho

1) 61,814,486 won x 2 times the flight amount of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (property flight abroad) in the judgment

2) The flight amount of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (property flight abroad) in the holding 61,814,486 x 5 times X1.5 (Aggravation of concurrent crimes)