Defendant 1 and five others

Book of Periodical;

Law Firm Subdivision et al.

Defendant 1 is punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year for the crime of injury and the crime of offering of bribe, and for the remaining crimes as indicated in the judgment, by imprisonment with prison labor for 7 years for the crime of injury, by imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months for the crime of injury, by Defendant 3 (Defendant 2 of the judgment of the Supreme Court), by imprisonment with prison labor for the remaining crimes as indicated in the judgment, by imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years and 3 years and 4 (Defendant 3 of the judgment of the Supreme Court) for 3 years and 5 months

However, with respect to the defendant 5, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Of the facts charged against Defendant 1, the facts charged against Defendant 5 that violate the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the composition and activity of an organization, etc.) among the facts charged against Defendant 5 are not guilty.

Defendant 6 (Defendant 4 of the Supreme Court Decision) is innocent.

[2011Gohap 4]

Ⅰ. The nature of the criminal organization of ○○ wave

○○○mion is a continuous combination of crimes under Article 4 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act with a view to the history, purpose, organization, funds, direction system, etc., which is a crime group having a leading system leading the organization or maintaining internal order.

1. History of the ○○m wave;

(a) Composition background of the ○○ wave;

From the beginning of the 1970s to the mid-1980s, there was no violence organization specially systemized, but there was a large number of "fluences" centered on middle and high school students, retired students, etc., and they were assembled in the center of specific party organs, multiple banks, and their age clubs.

On February 1987, 1987, Nonindicted 41, 5, 42, and 43, etc., centering on “△△△△△△△△,” which was located in the Seocho-si (hereinafter omitted), had been organized by the military branch, have led to the force of the organization of the military branch, and have exclusive rights to deliver, such as the know-how, and the water case, to acquire the right of interest, and organized “△△△△△△,” which is a violent organization.

△△△△△△, from the beginning of the 1990s to the beginning of the 1990s, was equipped with a systematic system centered on Nonindicted 5, and prepared a framework as a criminal organization, and expanded its powers in the △△○ region.

이에 피고인 6과 공소외 3, 6, 44, 45 등은 1993. 12.경 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 피고인 6 운영의 ‘ ♡♡♡♡가게’에서 △△△△파를 제거하고, 나아가 ◐◐지역 폭력조직의 통합을 목적으로 하는 폭력단체를 구성하기로 결의하고 일명 ‘ ◑◑◑◑’이라는 폭력조직을 결성하였다.

그 후 이들은 1994. 2.경 그동안 △△△△파의 세력에 눌려 지내던 군소조직인 ‘ ◈◈◈◈파’, ‘ ●●파’ 등을 규합한 후 피고인 6은 조직 활동의 일체를 지휘하는 두목급 수괴로, 공소외 3은 피고인 6을 보좌하여 그의 명에 따라 조직원의 통솔을 담당하는 부두목급 간부로, 공소외 46은 조직의 운영자금을 관리하는 부두목급 간부로, 공소외 6, 44, 47 등은 실제 사태 발생시 행동대원을 지휘하는 행동대장격 간부로 하는 ‘ ○○○파’라는 범죄단체를 구성하였다.

(b) Punishment of ○○○ wave and temporary restriction on organization;

After that, among the frequent collisions between △△△△△△ and its organization in an area outside of the △△△△ City or outside the scope of the △△△△△, most of its members, including Defendant 6, Nonindicted 3, 6, and 44, were detained due to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and thus, the organization became temporarily subject to the restriction of the organization.

C. Defendant 1 and Defendant 6

From the end of 1994, Defendant 6, who was detained in the custody of “○○mm” two, was Defendant 1 in the Cheongsong prison in around 1997.

Defendant 1 was engaged in the same activity as Nonindicted 5, under the number of Nonindicted 48, which was the most widely known violence in the ▽▽△ region at the time of around November 1985. However, around November 4, 1985, Defendant 1 conspired with Nonindicted 49, 4, 106, and Defendant 2 and conspired with Nonindicted 48 and was sentenced to a 20-year imprisonment for murder at Seoul High Court on August 12, 1986. As such, it was widely known that there was a crime of violence in the ▽▽△△ region.

around 197, Defendant 6 sent out to Nonindicted 3, 6, etc., who was confined in the detention house at the time of the detention house, that he was fluened by Defendant 1 as the larger punishment of Defendant 1. Nonindicted 3 and Nonindicted 6 had an interview with Defendant 1, who had been released in sequence from around 1988.

D. Defendant 6’s release and renewal of ○○m wave

Defendant 6 was released from the military court on November 1, 199, and first, was in contact with Nonindicted 3, 6, 50, etc., who was released from the military court, and was released from the military court. However, at the time of mind that the organization was re-convened, Nonindicted 1, who had formed a certain force in △△○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○,

At the time, Nonindicted 1 was faced with Nonindicted 30, 37, 54, 55, 56, 57, 57, 58, and 27 with Nonindicted 51, 52, and 53, based on the “△△△△”, and with Nonindicted 30, 37, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, and 27. However, Nonindicted 1 was faced with a crisis that gradually expands the influence on “△△△△△”, which

Accordingly, Defendant 6 and Nonindicted 1 et al. joined their forces at the end of 1999, and resolved to reconvene ○○○○m in order to secure economic benefits from the entertainment entertainment business establishments, entertainment taverns, etc., by admitting △△△△△△△△△△ in line with their leading powers. After that, Defendant 6 and Nonindicted 1 et al. endeavored to systematically recruit new staff and bring about ○○○○mm in order to attract economic benefits from the entertainment entertainment business establishments, entertainment bars, etc. After that, Defendant 6 and Nonindicted 1 et al. were in conflict with △△△△△△△△△△△, which were managed by △△△△△△△△△△△△△ in full order from early 200, thereby hindering the operation of △△△△△△△△△△△, threatening persons who are favorable to △△△△△△△△△, and re-act with the organizational funds from entertainment business establishments, etc.

Defendant 6 sent Nonindicted 1 to Chuncheon prison and sent him to Defendant 1 at that time, and Nonindicted 1 also visited Defendant 1 as his larger punishment from that time and provided personnel service.

(e) Restructuring of organizational structure;

After the reorganization of the organization, the ○○○mion was detained by Nonindicted 1 and its subordinate employees, including Nonindicted 51, 30, 37, 56, 9, 58, and 27, due to the dispute with the △△△△△△△, etc., and was subject to punishment due to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act.

Non-Indicted 1, who was detained by Defendant 6, the second ○○○mp, Defendant 6, who was not punished at the time, was dissatisfied with the order of Defendant 6 after he was released from the military court on bail on September 5, 2003.

At this time, Defendant 1, who had a certain influence on the ○○○○○○○ employee due to personal smoke with Defendant 6, etc., was at the time, was living with Defendant 6, Nonindicted 3, and Nonindicted 1 as a hotel hotel during the leave period from November 20, 2003 to November 25, 2003, and had Defendant 6, Nonindicted 3, and 1 live as a subordinate organization of Defendant 6, if it is difficult for Nonindicted 1 to gather and let Nonindicted 6 live as an advisory staff at the time of ○○○○ level, and Nonindicted 3, who had no special subordinate staff, was sponed to spon and continued his organizational life.

Accordingly, Nonindicted 1 was assigned to Nonindicted 3 with Nonindicted 30, 56, 9, 57, and 58, who followed himself, and Nonindicted 3 formed the largest force within the organization.

(f) Entry of an external force;

In 2005, Defendant 1, who was released from the prison, had a large amount of 00 mar criminal history in the prison, and had exercised certain influence during that period, began to work as the leader of an actual organization, and extended the capacity of 00 mar criminal history by entering the external force as follows.

1) The △△△△△ Head Defendant 4’s position

Defendant 4, who is Defendant 1, had a traditional conflict with the ○○○○m, was working as a senior executive of the △△△△△△△ Police, but due to the marriage relationship with Defendant 1, Defendant 1, the leader of △△△△△△△△△, etc., was in a state without any special force.

At the time of August 26, 2005, Non-Indicted 59, who was engaged in active activities at △△△△△△△△, failed to comply with the instructions of Non-Indicted 5, 60, etc., the leader of the above organization, and subsequently, Defendant 4 followed Defendant 4, along with the subordinate staff who raised a complaint and concealed himself. As such, Defendant 4 had a considerable force.

After that, from the end of December 2005, Defendant 4 started to perform the direction of Defendant 1 by taking advantage of his subordinate staff members, i.e., Defendant 6, Nonindicted 3, and 4, who was the ○○○○ Executive Officers.

2) The entry of Nonindicted 4, etc.

Defendant 1 recommended Nonindicted 4 and Defendant 2, who was detained as the accomplice of “Nonindicted 48 murder case” in the past around early 2006, to live together with the Defendant 1, who was in custody of Nonindicted 4 and Defendant 2, as the organization members of ○○m wave. Since that time, he was waiting for the Defendant 1’s release while working as the organization members of ○○○m wave.

(g) external forces;

As above, Defendant 1, who had occupied outside forces and expanded the size of the organization on a large scale, had taken advantage of the leave period from February 2, 2006 to February 7, 2006, to externally see the said external force, and to improve the organization system of ○○ wave centered on himself.

피고인 1은 2006. 2. 3.경 서울 강남구 삼성동 소재 인터콘티넨탈 호텔 지하 행사장에서, 공소외 61 등 원로 조직폭력배를 초청하고, 가수 공소외 62, 63, 64 등 연예인을 섭외하여 피고인 6, 공소외 3, 1, 30, 9 등 이전부터 있던 ○○○파 조직원들, 피고인 4, 공소외 59, 65, 66, 67, 68, 13, 31, 69, 70 등 피고인 4 휘하의 △△△△파 조직원들, 공소외 2, 71 등 공소외 72 휘하의 ▲▲파 하위조직원들과 공소외 4, 피고인 2 등을 참석하도록 하여 대대적인 귀휴행사를 진행하였다.

Defendant 6’s leader at the time, all of the assistants, who had been located there, was a large amount of fluoring Defendant 1, who she was fluored on the floor, on the floor.

After the completion of the foregoing events, Defendant 1 moved to a nearby dynasium, and Nonindicted 4, 3, Defendant 6, and Defendant 4 et al. moved to a nearby dynasium and moved to a nearby dynasium, and 90 staff members moved to a dynasium and dynasium to Defendant 1, while conducting dynasium and dynasium 90 staff members, and Defendant 1 puted to a dynasium. Defendant 1 all of the foregoing dynasium, “The foregoing dynasium dynasium and well dynasium,” and put to

H. Growth as the maximum violent organization in the ▽▽△ region

During that period, Non-Indicted 5, the leader of △△△△△△△△△△△ in a maximum violent organization in the △△△○ region, was detained and punished as a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the composition and activities of organizations, etc.) in response to his conviction around 2007, and the majority of the core staff of the △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△ branch, in which the core staff of the majority of the △△△△△△△△△ branch, was detained and tried to lose the core point of view, and the ○○○

2. ○○ radio wave;

The purpose of 00 ○○mmph is to secure economic benefits by participating in various interests, such as sexual traffic business establishments, sexual entertainment business establishments of △△△△△△ located in △△△△, which are engaged in activities in the same region, and based on the initiative of the violent world, which are based on the fact that △△△△△ is taking the initiative of the sexual violence organization, including △△△△△△△△△, which is engaged in activities in the same region, such as illegal entertainment facilities, entertainment bars, entertainment tavern business, etc.

3. Organizational system of ○○ wave;

A. Organizational system from December 1993 to the end of 2000

Defendant 6, Defendant 6, Nonindicted 3 assisting Defendant 6, who took charge of the direction of the steering staff, and Nonindicted 46, Nonindicted 6, Nonindicted 44, and Nonindicted 47, who managed the operating funds of the organization, were the head of the behavior level officer who directs the steering staff in the event of the actual situation. Nonindicted 73, 74, 75, 50, 54, 56, 75, 77, 75, 75, 78, 79, 80, etc.

B. Organizational system from the end of 2000 to March 2003

Defendant 6, Nonindicted 3, the advisory officer assisting Defendant 6, and Nonindicted 1, Nonindicted 52, 53, 54, 81, 37, 56, 9, 57, 58, 14, 27, 82, 82, and 83, etc., depending on the order of Defendant 6, Nonindicted 51, 52, 53, 54, 54, 81, 37, 56, 9, 57, 58, 14, 27, 82, and 83.

(c) Organizational system from the end of 2003 to the end of 2005;

Non-Indicted 1 and his subordinate officers enter Non-Indicted 3's insignias with Defendant 6, and Defendant 6 was in a situation where only some of his subordinate officers, including Non-Indicted 84, were fluored under the influence of Defendant 6.

On the other hand, Nonindicted 3, et al., e., 1 to Nonindicted 30, 58, 56, 9, 57, 85, 27, 83, Defendant 5, Nonindicted 28, 40, and 86, resulted in considerable force within the organization, and led Nonindicted 3 to the location of the second class leader.

Until now, Defendant 1 had been adjoining to ○○○○○ Judicial Team members with a big influence, but did not reach the stage of direct participation in external activities of the organization.

(d) Organizational system from the end of 2005 to the end of 2006;

Defendant 1, who had been discharged from the military court due to a large ○○ wave behind the past and formed a mutual relationship with the executive staff, was brupted by ○○○ wave’s second class leader, and committed various illegal crimes by using the investigative staff.

Defendant 1 was placed at the location of the second class leader who directs all the organizational activities, and Defendant 6, 4, 3, and 4 had their respective capabilities on a parallel basis at the location of the executives at the wharf level.

Defendant 1 referred himself as “the president” to his assistant members, and had the above assistant members referred to as “the president”.

In addition, Defendant 1 separately managed Non-Indicted 13, in which he was appointed as the two children and Non-Indicted 13 and his subordinate officer, respectively.

At the time, Defendant 6 managed some of the assistants, including Nonindicted 84, Nonindicted 4, Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 15, 24, and 33, and Nonindicted 3 managed the assistants, including Nonindicted 1, 30, 56, 58, 9, 57, 27, 87, Defendant 5, Nonindicted 88, 89, 21, and 28, respectively.

E. Organizational system from the end of 2006 to the present time

As Nonindicted 4 was detained by Nonindicted 4 at the end of 2006, Defendant 3, who was the senior executive of Nonindicted 4’s behavior level, was located in the seat of the lower-class executive of the wharf and was in charge of Nonindicted 24, 15, 33, who was the subordinate organization.

Nonindicted 56, 58, and 9 had been living as a subordinate organization of Defendant 3 according to the direction of Defendant 1 around September 2009, when Nonindicted 1 left the organization of Nonindicted 1 and left the organization of China, and Nonindicted 3 rejected them by taking care of Nonindicted 27,87, etc., which are their subordinate organization.

4. The fund system for ○○ wave.

The ○○○m wave has been organized by using the fund for the receipt of protection expenses, the payment of money, and the payment of money through the use of violence, etc. against ○○○○m, which is an entertainment worker and a ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, etc.

특히, 2006년경부터는 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 건물 1층의 일명 ‘ ■■■ 매장’ 게임장, ▣▣시 (이하 생략) 소재 ‘ ☆☆☆☆☆’ 게임장(일명 ‘ ♤♤♤♤ 게임장’) 등 ▽▽시 일원에서 10여개의 사행성게임장을 운영하면서 상당한 금원을 확보하였다.

In addition, around May 2006, Nonindicted 90 Co., Ltd. engaged in the construction business by approaching Nonindicted 10, a representative director of Nonindicted 90 Co., Ltd., who was engaged in the construction business, and obtained a construction right, and around July 2006, Nonindicted 91 Co., Ltd., who was engaged in the redevelopment business located in the urban development project district located in the urban development project district (hereinafter omitted), requested Nonindicted 93 Co., Ltd., a competition company, to prohibit the implementation of the project, and received KRW 15 million from Nonindicted Co. 92 upon the request of Nonindicted Co. 92, a competition company, and received KRW 15 million.

The funds raised by these methods were used to cover the expenses of the staff who committed a systematic crime such as the cost of the repair, the cost of the lawyer's fee and the amount of the custody of the staff under detention, and the expenses of the staff under detention.

5. A command system of ○○ radio wave;

(a) Direction system from around 200 to around 2005 from the organizational restructuring of Defendant 6;

At the time of Defendant 6’s renewal of ○○○ wave, the direction system was issued from Defendant 6, the leader, through Nonindicted 1, to the steering staff. From the end of 2003, Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 3 moved from Nonindicted 3 to the lower part of Nonindicted 3, the direction system was issued to the steering staff through Nonindicted 1.

(b) Direction system from the time of Defendant 1’s activities at the end of 2005;

1) Direction to Defendant 1’s executive officers and staff members

From early 2006 to August 2006, Defendant 1 brought in and used the mobile phone to the Daejeon Prison. From November 2009 to May 201, Defendant 1 had freely used the internal telephone and mobile phone in the Ansan Prison.

Defendant 1, around early 2006, placed the executives at the wharf level such as Nonindicted 4, Defendant 6, 4, and Nonindicted 3 in a virative position, directed Defendant 1 to make a telephone call available at any time by possessing 24 hours a opporton for one’s contact with him. At each case, Defendant 1 directed the staff at the wharf level through a meeting to discuss the matters of his own direction and to report the result thereof.

In particular, after the entry of Nonindicted 4, Defendant 1 sent various instructions to Defendant 6, 4, and Nonindicted 3 through Nonindicted 4, and received a report on the measures accordingly.

(ii)the direction of subordinate officers;

Defendant 6, 4, and executive officers, including Nonindicted 3, and 4, who were contacted by Defendant 1, followed Defendant 1’s instructions by having their subordinate staff contact with each other in sequence through the code of conduct under his command.

As ○○○m wave gradually increases in the size of ○○○m, a deceptive order has been established between the class members based on the age, and as bundled, the majority of the class members of the lower group became a member of the organization, and after joining ○○m, the majority of the class members of the lower group were to implement instructions given from the class members of the higher group who are adjacent to themselves while they did not actually meet the group members.

(c) Operation of accommodation for assistant employees;

The ○○○m wave prepared a lodging with the organizational fund and prepared a deadly weapon such as a knife and the camping net, and prepared for a competitive organization with the △△△△△, a competitive organization.

Among the members living in a dormitory, the highest lighting staff became the chief of a lodging room, and implemented a mobilization order for the executive officers of the behavioral commander's level, and the internal rules of the organization, such as the example of worship, were applied to the new teaching staff.

Major accommodation operated by ○○○ is as follows:

- The lower-ranking employees of Nonindicted Party 1, including Nonindicted Party 94, from the second floor of the ▽△ Si (hereinafter omitted) located from the end of 1999 to the beginning of 2000 to the beginning of 2000.

- Nonindicted 4 and Defendant 3’s subordinate officers, including Nonindicted 24, under the direction of Nonindicted 33, 95, 15, 25, 96, from April 2006 to the end of 2006, under the direction of Nonindicted 24, in the first floor of the building located in the ▽△△ Si (hereinafter omitted).

- The subordinate officers of Nonindicted 3, such as Nonindicted 89, 88, 40, 28, 97, and 98, from May 2006 to mid-2007, in front of an elementary school (hereinafter referred to as “non-indicted 3”) to the middle-time of an elementary school

- Non-Indicted 3’s subordinate officers, including Non-Indicted 19, 40, 28, 99, 22, 97, 100, 98, and 101, under the direction of Non-Indicted 3 in the house adjacent to the head of an accommodation, from mid-2007 to April 2008 (hereinafter omitted).

- The accommodation of Nonindicted 3’s subordinate officers, including Nonindicted 102, 103, 104, 23, and 105, under the direction of Nonindicted 88, from November 2009 to February 201, under the direction of Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 102, 103, 104, 23, and 105.

6. Group of assistants; and

(a) Training of new assistants;

In the early period of the △△△△△ re-revision, it was difficult for Defendant 5 and Nonindicted 22,86, 28, 40, 99, 24, and 15 to seek new staff by pushing ahead with the power of the △△△△△△△△ branch. Accordingly, there were many cases where the ○○○○ branch received organization members in other areas than Defendant 5 and Nonindicted 22, 86, 28, 40, 9, 24, and 15, or Nonindicted 84, 88, and 87 to join the △△△△△△△ branch as an organization.

However, from the end of 2006, from the end of 2006, the number of graduates from the ▽▽△△ middle and high schools, who had been employed as the maximum organization of the ▽▽▽△△ region, there was no difficulty in recruiting new staff members because there were many of them who want to join the ○○m among them and have good physical strength.

New assistants joined ○○○m by selecting them as organization members among their post-speaks, joining them as organization members, and allowing them to be personnel to be engaged in pre-speaks. After joining ○○m, they received education on the code of conduct, internal rules, etc. as organization members through night life, etc.

(b) Internal norms;

○○○ did not have any separate internal rules in documentized in the ○○ wave. However, the inside of the organization had an example and action guidelines for vessel crew to be necessarily observed, etc., and new assistant staff received education from high-ranking staff through their lives, etc.

In the example and action guidelines for major vessel crew, the first line is 90 degreesed in 190 degrees, and the second line is to be able to speak on the ship, it is to be attached to the "grat" and "grat" at all times, and the third line is not absolute against the end of the ship, fourth line is not opened until the ship causes a seat on the spot, and fifth line calls from the ship are also subject to noon.

In particular, Defendant 1, who was under the guard around 2006, issued a special direction to the steering staff. The contents of Defendant 1, when visiting Defendant 1, did not do so, unless there are special circumstances. ② In meeting, Defendant 1, who was under the guard, did not put the elbow to the meeting chros, etc., and ③ in the case of Defendant 1’s writing, he visited Defendant 1 within three days, unless there are special circumstances.

(c) Contests;

- Nonindicted 30, 37, 54, 55, 56, 9, 57, 58, and 27, who had been employed by Nonindicted 1 and subordinate staff at the time of the reorganization of the organization at the end of 1999, were gathered in the system and participated in the system, and Defendant 6 was above Defendant 6, and the resolution of the △△△△△△△△△△△ was adopted, and the decision of the staff was firmly maintained.

-In 2007, the early 27, 89, 88, 28, 28, 40, 107, 21, 97, 98, 101, and 108, etc., of the white reservoir in Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-do, 200, crew members of the teams, such as water skiing, etc., re-skid new staff, and re-spad among them.

(d) Sanctions against organization personnel;

1) Punishment of an officer by referring to 'distinct'

○○○○m, in the event that a subordinate employee does not follow the direction of a vessel steering staff, disturbs the internal order of the organization, or intends to withdraw from the organization, the vessel steering staff has taken the discipline of the steering staff by making a 'distincing', which is called ‘distincing’ at the time of the steering staff' with the camping net, and the main examples are as follows.

- around 2006, Nonindicted 28 and Nonindicted 99, who was the head of an accommodation at the time of Nonindicted 89, who was the head of an accommodation at the time of the withdrawal from the organization, because it was difficult for Nonindicted 28 and Nonindicted 99, who was in Incheon, to live in ○○○m, who was affiliated with the ○○○m in Incheon, to escape from the organization, was prevented from withdrawing from the organization in a 20-year amounting to 20 am.

ㅇ 2007. 10.경 피고인 3은 공소외 3 부친의 장례식장에서 자신의 하위조직원인 공소외 15가 공소외 3의 하위조직원인 공소외 9의 빰을 때리면서 소란을 피웠다는 이유로 야구방망이로 공소외 15의 엉덩이를 수회 때렸다.

- around 2007, Non-Indicted 89 erred in the education of Non-Indicted 108 who had been living in a room, and Non-Indicted 97, 109, 21, and 98, who had been employed by Non-Indicted 108 higher-ranking staff, were 10 times each at the night.

ㅇ 2010. 3. 초경 안성시 (이하 생략) ‘산장휴게소’ 부근 야산에서 ○○○파에서 생활하던 공소외 110, 111, 103이 ○○○파를 탈퇴하여 ★★지역에 있는 폭력조직인 ‘ ▼▼▼▼▼’로 가려한다는 이유로 ○○○파 조직원인 공소외 87, 89는 야구방망이로 동인들의 엉덩이를 각각 10회씩 때렸다.

2) Withdrawal from Nonindicted 1’s organization

Defendant 1: (a) around November 2003, Nonindicted 1, an executive organization of the behavioral commander, was in conflict with Defendant 6, who was the leader of the ○○○○m, and was ordered by Nonindicted 1 to arbitrate and have him live under the number of Nonindicted 3; (b) on the ground that Nonindicted 1 caused the extinguishment with Nonindicted 3 in early half of 2006; and (c) on the part of Nonindicted 1, who was subject to sanctions against Nonindicted 1, who disrupted the order within the organization.

Accordingly, on March 3, 2006, Defendant 6, upon Defendant 1’s order, induced Nonindicted 1 to the office of Seocho-gu △△△△△△△ ( omitted), and ordered Nonindicted 84 to terrorism Nonindicted 1. However, Nonindicted 1, who was detained on August 11, 2006, went into China after he was released from Korea on November 30, 2006.

7. Details of the principal systematic activities of the ○○ wave.

(a) The conflict with the △△△△△ branch;

1) The conflict between Defendant 6’s ○○○○m and △△△△m

While the ○○○○○ branch was unable to have a special organizational dispute over the force of △△△ branch at the time of the formation of the ○○ branch, it was in conflict with the △△△ branch in full-time from around 2001, which had a certain force after Defendant 6 released from the △△ branch around November 1999, and reconvened the ○○ branch with Nonindicted Party 1, thereby securing a certain force.

- The front known map with △△△△△ on August 18, 2001

In 2001, Defendant 6 decided that the size and organization of the ○○○mmp were growing to the extent that it could oppose the △△△△△mp, and that at the time, Defendant 6 instructed Nonindicted 1, who had been engaged in the behavior-level senior staff, to check with the △△△△△△△△△mp, he would not be avoided. The rear side of the inside of the inside of the inside of the inside of the inside of the outside of the inside of the outside of the outside of the outside of the outside of the outside of the outside of the board

At the time, Nonindicted 112, 113, etc., Nonindicted 112, and 113, etc., who are the organization of △△△△△△△, directly run a leap establishment in the △△○○○, a place of residence located in △△△△△△ (hereinafter omitted), and used a large amount of money by putting a le seat on the card, as an organizational fund. Nonindicted 1 was willing to attack the said establishment by mobilization of the lighting staff.

At around 04:00 on August 18, 2001, Nonindicted 1, 30, and 56 entered a knife at a △△△△△△△ Group’s △△△△△△△ Group’s △△△△△△△ Group’s 112, and assault employees, and damaged the property, such as shouldering the above △△△ Party’s free shop, and 10 employees of the flife were divided into 3 to 4 vehicles, and compared with the situation.

While Nonindicted 1, 30, and 56 continued to discover the △△△△△△△△△ in the foregoing business establishment, Nonindicted 1, 30, and 56 continued to discover the victim Nonindicted 114, who was the cause of the △△△△△△△△△△ branch, before around 04:30 (hereinafter omitted), and Nonindicted 1, 30, and 56, etc. damaged the vehicle by hand and knife, and threatened the said victim.

- Cases of damage to ○○○○ case on January 14, 2003

Nonindicted 1, 56, 9, and 115, according to Defendant 6’s order, carried with Defendant 6, around January 14, 2003, ○○○○○○ University located in △△△ Si (hereinafter omitted) and damaged property, and inflicted an injury on employees.

2) The conflict between Defendant 1’s ○○○○m and △△△△m.

At early 2006, Defendant 1, who began to externally move to the full organization of the organization, removed Nonindicted 5, who was the leader of △△△△△△△, from Nonindicted 4, 3, Defendant 6, and 4, who was the executive staff at the time of the early 2006, and had Defendant 1 make a close preparation in order to impose the power of △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△.

- Nonindicted 5 terrorism led by Defendant 4’s assistants

Defendant 6, 4, and Nonindicted 4 and Nonindicted 3, who are the executive officers at the wharf level, who were ordered by Defendant 1 to be engaged in the work against Nonindicted 5, led the overall execution of Defendant 4 and the direct work carried out by Nonindicted 13, etc. at the end of the several meetings from February 2, 2006 to March 206. The other executive officers assigned their roles to prepare for the situation.

그 후 2006. 3. 3.경 피고인 4의 하위조직원인 공소외 13, 67 등은 회칼 등 흉기를 소지하고 공소외 5가 자주 가는 ‘ ⓧⓧ 양품점’과 ‘ ◇◇ 웨딩홀’ 등을 돌아다니며 공소외 5를 찾으러 다녔다.

당시 공소외 4, 피고인 6은 ▽▽시 소재 ‘ ♣♣♣ 모텔’에 모여 조직원들로부터 상황을 보고 받으면서 조직원들을 움직였으며, ○○○파 조직원들 외에도 외부 조직으로부터 지원받은 폭력배들도 ▽▽에 모여 만일의 사태를 준비하였다.

- Nonindicted 5 terrorism led by Nonindicted 3’s assistants

Defendant 1, around May 2006, instructed Nonindicted 3 to take part in the work on Nonindicted 5 by using a steering staff.

Nonindicted 3 delivered Nonindicted 1’s instructions to Nonindicted 1 and his subordinate staff, who are the senior executive organization of the behavioral commander, that “Nonindicted 5’s shot and kne-sneing banks will feng and kne-sneing sneed and thrown down sne.”

On May 2006, Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 87, Defendant 88, Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 28, Nonindicted 86, and Nonindicted 109, mainly in place of Nonindicted 5, had the vehicle by searching for Nonindicted 5’s rapion at the △△△-si hotel parking lot, but the discovery was not possible, Defendant 5, Nonindicted 86, and Nonindicted 109 are waiting at the entrance of the parking lot. Nonindicted 87, 88, and 28, after Nonindicted 5 prepared two camping nets on the vehicle, “the person who discovered Nonindicted 5” was 5 after the person prepared two camping nets on the vehicle, and other persons were able to find out Nonindicted 5’s kne and knene with the camping net.

-Removal of the core force of △△△△ by reporting the press and the investigative agency

위와 같은 일이 있은 후 공소외 4는 피고인 1의 지시에 따라 지역지인 ▶▶▶▶신문의 기자를 만나 위 사건을 제보하여 2006. 3. 12.경 ‘조폭 내분에 떨고 있는 ▽▽’이라는 제목 하에 위 사건에 대한 기사가 나가도록 하여 조직폭력배들의 다툼이 이슈화 되도록 하고, 수사기관에 공소외 5의 범죄혐의를 제보하는 등으로 그 수사가 이루어지도록 하였다.

(iii) Other cases:

ㅇ 2006. 7. 26. ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 ♠♠ 유흥주점에서 ○○○파 조직원이던 공소외 56이 △△△△파 조직원들에게 폭행당한 것이 발단이 되어 공소외 27의 연락을 받고 그곳에 온 ○○○파 조직원 공소외 28, 86과 피고인 5는 20여명의 △△△△파 조직원들과 야구방망이, 목검 등을 휘두르며 싸운 바 있다.

- In 2007, Nonindicted 88, 89, 116, and 117, etc., of ○○○○○ (Seoul High School), a mid-2007, cited the camping net in the entertainment room operated by the △△△△△ Police Officers, thereby damaging entertainment machinery and equipment located therein.

- On April 8, 2008, around 2008, Nonindicted 118, 40, 19, and 28, etc. committed assault against Nonindicted 119 and Nonindicted 120, a cause of the △△△△△△ Party’s organization, and Nonindicted 121, 122, and 119 were replaced by 20 persons, respectively.

- Around December 2009, Nonindicted 110, who was employed by Nonindicted 126, 123, 127, 128, 129, and 125, etc., who were employed by Nonindicted 126, 123, 127, 128, and 129, who were employed by Nonindicted 17, 110, 111, 103, 102, 104, 105, 20, 20, 23, 124, and 125, etc., who were employed by the △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△, was exposed to Nonindicted 126, 123, 127, 128, and 129.

나. ▣▣ ◑◑◑◑◑파 조직과의 집단폭력

▣▣지역 ‘ ◑◑◑◑◑파’ 조직원으로 활동하다가 2007. 7.경 ○○○파에 가입한 조직원 공소외 108은 ▣▣시내에서 배회하던 중 ◑◑◑◑◑파 조직원인 공소외 130과 공소외 131로부터 ‘선배에게 인사를 하지 않는다.’는 이유로 따귀를 맞는 등 폭행을 당하였다.

이러한 소식을 들은 ○○○파 조직원 공소외 21은 하위조직원에게 ▣▣ 시외버스터미널로 급히 모일 것을 지시하여 2007. 7. 25. 22:00경 ○○○파 조직원 공소외 97, 21, 107, 132, 98, 101 등은 야구방망이 등을 준비하고 그랜져 XG 승용차 2대에 나누어 타고 위 ▣▣시외버스터미널 앞 노상까지 이동하여 그곳에 있던 ◑◑◑◑◑파 조직원 공소외 130, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138 등과 상호간 야구방망이, 벽돌 등으로 가격하며 집단적인 패싸움을 벌였다.

(c) Crimes of systematic conflict;

ㅇ 2001. 8. 초순경 공소외 1, 52, 53, 51 등 ○○○파 조직원들은 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 피해자 공소외 139 운영의 ♥♥♥♥ 음식점에서, ○○○파 조직원임을 과시하며 ‘ △△△△파와 전쟁을 하겠으니 1,000만 원을 달라’고 말하며 피해자 공소외 139를 협박하여 금원을 갈취하려고 시도한 바 있었다.

ㅇ 2002. 10. 5. 공소외 1, 30 등 ○○○파 조직원들은 ▣▣시 (이하 생략) 소재 야산으로 피해자 공소외 140을 끌고 가 “폐기물 사업을 하려고 하는데 투자하라”며 피해자 공소외 140의 눈을 감게 하고 밧줄을 목에 매달아 당기는 등으로 위협하여 금원을 갈취하려고 시도하였다.

- From mid-2006, Defendant 1 intentionally accessed the victim non-indicted 10, the representative director of the non-indicted 90 corporation, who is the non-indicted 10 corporation, who is a major representative of the construction business in the ▽▽△ City, to see a large number of trillion staff members and to damage their vehicles, etc. Based on this, Defendant 1 was issued from the victim non-indicted 10 to 260 million won a car at the market price of 200 million won from the victim non-indicted 10. Based on this, Defendant 1 received the victim non-indicted 10 with the construction interest, such as scrap iron, Changho Construction, Commercial Building Sales Agency, and Electrical and Fire-Fighting Power, etc. related to the execution of the first and second apartment from the victim non-indicted 10.

- Defendant 1 did not pay the remainder of the company operated by the victim Nonindicted 8 at his own discount around the middle half-yearly in 2006, and the victim Nonindicted 4 and Defendant 3 mobilized staff, and received two automobiles with a total of KRW 9,100,000 from the victim Nonindicted 8 by threatening Nonindicted 8.

(d) Clean violence events;

- From March 2004 to June 2004, 000, Nonindicted 1, 56, 58, 9, and 27, Nonindicted 1, 2004 (including Nonindicted 1, 56, 58, 9, and 27, the victims of Nonindicted 142’s operation from Nonindicted 171 to Nonindicted 142, in relation to the purchase of the apartment site from Nonindicted 142’s operation of the victim Nonindicted 142, the victim Nonindicted 142 was subject to organized violence, and Nonindicted 1, 141 was able to have the victim Nonindicted 1, 142 take up the amount equivalent to KRW 683 million in the name of the prop work cost.

- On June 1, 2006, Nonindicted 4, Defendant 3, Nonindicted 24, Nonindicted 15, and 33, etc. were assaulted by Nonindicted 92, a competitor Nonindicted 93, the victim Nonindicted 7 of Nonindicted 93, who was a competitor, by the request of Nonindicted 92, in connection with an urban development project, to conduct an implementation agent business with the trade name of Nonindicted 91, Nonindicted 92, in connection with the urban development project, and received KRW 15 million in return.

II. Specific criminal facts

1. Defendant 1

【Criminal Power】

The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul High Court on August 12, 1986 for the crime of murder; on September 14, 1991, two years and six months for the crime of offering of bribe at the Gwangju High Court on July 29, 2007; on October 5, 2007, the term of the punishment expires; on the part of the criminal of violation of the Public Official Election Act at the Daejeon High Court on October 5, 2007, he was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the portion of the criminal of violation of the Public Official Election Act; on January 18, 2008, he was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the portion of the criminal of violation of the Public Official Election

【Criminal Facts】

At the end of 2005, the Defendant, who had exercised certain influence over the past, was able to bring the foundation for the release of the Defendant. On February 3, 2006, at the hotel underground event site located in Samsung-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Seoul, a large amount of ○○m wave due to receiving a large amount from ○○m wave staff, and such ○○m wave was known to be a criminal organization and joined the above organization with knowledge that ○○m wave was a criminal organization.

2. Defendant 2

【Criminal Power】

On November 12, 2003, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment of two years and six months on December 9, 2005 with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act at the Suwon District Court’s Eunpyeong site, and the term of the punishment expires on December 9, 2005. On May 23, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to ten months on September 7, 2007 by committing a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc. at the Suwon District Court’s Pyeongtaek site and was sentenced to the said judgment.

【Criminal Facts】

(a) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Organization and activity of an organization, etc.);

From the end of 2005, the Defendant found Defendant 1 to Adong prison in several times, and around February 2006, Defendant 1 participated in an event that ○○○mp officer and personnel is divided from the hotel located in Samsung-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul around February 2, 2006, and around that time, ○○mp officer and the above ○○mp officer were aware that ○○m is a criminal organization.

(b) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc.;

피고인은 2006. 8. 26.경부터 2006. 9. 5.경까지 ▣▣시 (이하 생략) 소재 ‘ ☆☆☆☆☆’ 게임장에서, ○○○파의 수괴인 피고인 1로부터 위 게임장의 지분 10% 정도를 받기로 하고 자신의 명의로 위 게임장을 등록하였다.

그 후 ○○○파 조직원인 공소외 13은 그곳에 설치된 ☆☆☆☆☆ 게임기 60여대와 환전소를 관리하면서 그곳을 찾은 손님들로 하여금 현금 1만 원권을 위 기계에 투입한 후 일정한 점수를 베팅하고 게임을 진행하여 화면상의 릴이 회전하여 우연히 같은 그림이나 숫자가 열을 맞추어 나오면 정해진 점수를 획득하고, 게임 중 우연히 해파리, 고래 등이 예시되면 정해진 점수에 추가하여 한번에 최대 200만점까지 얻을 수 있는 위 게임을 하게 한 다음, 위 게임 화면상에 손님들이 얻은 점수 5,000점당 액면금 5,000원의 상품권 1장이 배출되면, 위 게임장 인근에 설치된 환전소에서 위 상품권을 환전수수료 10%를 공제한 현금 4,500원으로 환전하여 주는 방법으로 위 게임장을 운영하도록 하였다.

Accordingly, in collusion with Defendant 1 and Nonindicted 13, the Defendant engaged in speculative activities by allowing customers to take advantage of the speculative gaming machines and to take property benefits by making them use of the speculative gaming machines and allowing them to take advantage of the speculative methods.

3. Defendant 3

【Criminal Power】

On November 23, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on December 1, 2006 to imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of extortion at the Suwon District Court Sejong District Court on August 23, 2006, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 1, 2006. On February 11, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of extortion at the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch on September 16, 2009, and the term of imprisonment was terminated on September 28, 2010; on October 28, 2010, the Suwon District Court was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, Etc. at the Suwon District Court on December

【Criminal Facts】

Around June 2006, the Defendant received a large amount of money from Nonindicted 4, etc., along with Nonindicted 24, 33, 15, and 25, etc., which are Nonindicted 24, 33, 15, and 25, in a restaurant (hereinafter omitted), which is a criminal organization, and around that time, the Defendant joined the above organization with knowledge that the ○○m wave

4. Defendant 4

【Criminal Power】

On October 5, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for one year at the Suwon District Court for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict), etc., and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 13, 2010.

【Criminal Facts】

In around the end of 2005, the Defendant took 59, who is a subordinate organization of the Daejeon Correctional Institution, and took personnel as a part in Defendant 1. On February 3, 2006, the Defendant attended the leave event of Defendant 1 at the ○○○○○mpon hotel located in Samsung-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and divided between ○○○○mpon and personnel. From around that time, the Defendant, along with Defendant 6, Nonindicted 4, and 3, who is an employee of the ○○○mp on the ○○mpon, was a criminal organization, and was aware that the above ○○○m on the first day of 2006, was a criminal organization, and joined the above organization as an executive member of the wharf level.

5. Defendant 5

【Criminal Power】

On November 15, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for six months at the Incheon District Court due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collective, deadly weapons, etc.) and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years at the Incheon District Court, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on November 23, 2007

【Criminal Facts】

피고인은 2006. 7. 26. 00:00경 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 건물의 지하 1층에 있는 ‘ ♠♠’ 유흥주점에서, ○○○파 조직원들인 공소외 56, 27이 △△△△파 조직원들인 피해자 공소외 146, 143, 144, 145 등으로부터 폭행을 당하였다는 연락을 받고 ○○○파 조직원인 공소외 28, 86과 함께 위험한 물건인 알루미늄 야구방망이와 목검을 소지하고 그곳으로 갔다.

At all times, the Defendant committed assault against the above victims, including Nonindicted 56, 27, by combining them with Aluminium opens and brupties, △△△△△△△, who are the △△△△△△△ staff.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with Nonindicted 56, 27, 28, and 86, assaulted the victims by carrying dangerous objects.

[2011Gohap 13]

1. Joint principal offenders by Defendant 1 and 3

A. Crimes against the victim non-indicted 7

On April 2006, Defendant 1 received the request from Nonindicted 92 who operated the event of the urban development project by the Daejeon Correctional Institution for requesting the help of his business.

Accordingly, Defendant 1 instructed Defendant 3 through Nonindicted 4, who is his subordinate organization, to refrain from terrorism against Nonindicted 7 who works for Nonindicted 93 Stock Company.

피고인 3은 2006. 6. 19. 오후경 ▣▣시 (이하 생략) 소재 건물 2층에 있는 공소외 93 주식회사 사무실에 조직원인 공소외 24, 33, 15, 26, 25 등과 함께 찾아가 공소외 24, 33, 15, 26, 25 등은 조직폭력배임을 과시하면서 팔짱을 끼고 출입문 앞을 막고 서서 피해자 공소외 7에게 위력을 과시하고, 피고인 3은 피해자 공소외 7에게 “여기가 로이오지? 외지 것들이 왜 ▽▽에 와서 해 쳐먹냐.”라며 주먹으로 위 피해자 공소외 7의 안면부를 1회 강타하였다.

Defendant 3 had two temporary employees of Nonindicted Co. 93, whose name and Nonindicted Co. 7 are unknown, knee knee knee, and had Nonindicted Co. 15 carry out an inspection, which is a dangerous object in Nonindicted Co. 33’s vehicle, and had Nonindicted Co. 15 carry out an inspection. Defendant 3 carried out the above inspection as follows: “I am knee, I am grae in Seoul, and I am grae in Seoul,” and the victim Nonindicted Co. 7’s shouldered the Defendant’s shoulder with the above knee, so that the number of days of treatment cannot be known to him, and the amtete et te et te et al. was ste.

Defendant 3 continued to have the victim Nonindicted 7 met the identification card at the victim Nonindicted 7’s wall so that he can get the victim Nonindicted 7 to attend the above office, such as the above steering staff, while having the victim take the identification card “if he reported,” and having the victim Nonindicted 7, who was frighten.

After that, around July 11, 2006, Defendant 1 was delivered KRW 15 million in cash from Nonindicted 92 through Nonindicted 4 in the name of repair expenses for the above actions.

As a result, the Defendants conspired with Nonindicted 4 and other members of the ○○○mion and carried with Nonindicted 7, a dangerous object, and carried them with the victim Nonindicted 7’s eye, where the number of days of treatment can not be known, and carried out dtetetete dyiles.

B. Crimes against the victim non-indicted 8

Defendant 1, around 2006, instructed Nonindicted 8, a textile company operated by Nonindicted Co. 35, who was supplied with “original death” from Nonindicted Co. 147, a fiber Co. 147, which was one of his major partners, did not pay the price, Defendant 1 instructed Nonindicted 4, a subordinate organization, Nonindicted 8, who used the victim Nonindicted 8, to collect the said price by assaulting and threatening the victim Nonindicted 8.

1) 피고인 3은 공소외 4를 통하여 위와 같은 피고인 1의 지시를 받고, 2006. 6. 중순경 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 피해자 공소외 8 운영의 ‘ ◁◁섬유’ 공장 2층 사무실로 공소외 15, 33, 24, 96, 25 등 하위조직원들을 데리고 가 동인들로 하여금 사무실 문 앞에서 자신을 향하여 90도로 허리를 굽혀 인사를 하면서 “형님, 오셨습니까.”라고 외치도록 하여 위세를 과시하고, 공소외 24와 함께 사무실 안으로 들어갔다.

Defendant 3, who completed the work in the office of the victim Nonindicted 8 and Nonindicted 148, his father, as the head of the said Nonindicted 147 Stock Company, and Nonindicted 24, were the head of the said office, and the head of Nonindicted 8, etc., were the head of the said office. Defendant 3 saw the victim Nonindicted 8, etc., and expressed his eye, “I want to be fright, but he must make a full payment, and fright,” and Nonindicted 24, who was next to the said office, was frightly frighted to the victim Nonindicted 8, etc., even if she was frighted by the head of the relevant office.

2) On June 2006, Defendant 3 followed 2-3 days after the same case as indicated in the above paragraph (1) of the same paragraph, followed by Nonindicted 33, 15, 24, 96, 25, etc., and sought again to the second floor office of the above factory, and made an appearance to the victim Nonindicted 8. Defendant 3 was examined as follows: (a) he tried to look at how he did so; (b) how he did so; (c) he was able to look at; (d) he was the head of Nonindicted 147 corporation; (d) he was actually the head of the inside, but he was the head of the department of Nonindicted 147 corporation; (d) she was able to look at the office gate; and (e) Nonindicted 24 et al. al., she was frighted to walk up the office gate and walk up the office gate, and then she was frightd to any extent to the victim’s hum.

3) On June 2006, Defendant 3 requested 2-3 days after the same case as the above 2-3 day after the occurrence of the case as described in the above 2-mentioned paragraph (2) of this Article, Defendant 3, who was his relative, requested 4 to provide assistance to the assistant staff. Defendant 4 supported Nonindicted 67, 31, 69, and 70 which was able to be supported by Defendant 4, 15, 33, 24, and 25 who were under his or her or her or her or her or her or her or son, and returned to the above factory

Defendant 3, among the above assistants, entered Nonindicted 67 and Nonindicted 31 and entered the second floor office, and the rest of the assistants were the staff of the victim Nonindicted 8, who were viewed as the office, and the staff of the victim Nonindicted 8 were able to give a view to the victim Nonindicted 8, and let the steering staff of the above assistant, "e.g., g., g., g., and g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., g., the victim

4) On June 2006, Defendant 3 instructed Non-Indicted 24, who was a 2-3rd day after the occurrence of the same case as indicated in the above paragraph (3) of this Article, to the effect that Defendant 3: (a) instructed Non-Indicted 24, “The victim Non-Indicted 8’s house, which was adjacent to the above factory, was frighted to go to the victim Non-Indicted 8’s house; and (b) had Non-Indicted 24 enter the above factory for 3 days; (c) had the victim Non-Indicted 8’s house; and (d) had the victim Non-Indicted 8 and 8’s family members live with it while monitoring their actions.

5) On June 2006, Defendant 3 did not repay his obligation to the victim Nonindicted 8 on the date of the promise, and found the factory again with Nonindicted 4, etc., and Nonindicted 4 got the victim Nonindicted 8 to find the said factory, and Defendant 4 got the victim Nonindicted 8 to find his wife in a place where his father is good. The victim Nonindicted 8 continued not to repay his obligation, Defendant 3 took the place as if the victim Nonindicted 8 were forced the victim Nonindicted 8 to sell his her her her her her son to the amusement establishment, etc., and got the victim Nonindicted 8 to get him to get 4.8 million won (vehicle registration number 1 omitted) and 4.3 million won (vehicle registration number 2 omitted) at the market price, respectively.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired jointly with Nonindicted 4 and Defendant 4, which are the cause of the ○○○○ wave organization, and, if the victim Nonindicted 8 did not repay his debt, act as if the victim Nonindicted 8 were to inflict any harm on the life or body of the victim Nonindicted 8 and his family members, thereby reconcing the two above automobiles with the total market price of KRW 9,100,000 from Nonindicted 8 of the victim Nonindicted 8 who frighted to drink it.

C. Crimes against the victim non-indicted 6

Defendant 1 sent Nonindicted 4’s warning to Nonindicted 6, who had been under his former control, of Nonindicted 4’s attempt to inform the investigation agency of his behavior, and of Nonindicted 6, who was attending Nonindicted 4’s interview during his prison, via his assistant staff.

Defendant 1, while disregarding the above warning, told Nonindicted 6 Nonindicted 11 of the victim Nonindicted 11 of his expression “I do not know with that person, and is not superior.” Defendant 1 had the victim’s words “I do not know with that person.........................”

Accordingly, around December 4, 2009, Defendant 1 shown that Defendant 3, Nonindicted 11, and Nonindicted 13 met in the same prison, and on the same day, Defendant 3 instructed Defendant 3 to go to the victim Nonindicted 6 by telephone on the same day.

그 후 피고인 3은 2009. 12. 8. 오후경 공소외 11을 통하여 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 ‘ ◆◆◆◆ 커피숍’으로 피해자 공소외 6을 유인하고, 하위조직원인 공소외 9로 하여금 위 가게 안으로 들어가 공소외 11과 같이 있는 피해자 공소외 6을 가게 밖으로 끌고 나가 “ ▽▽에 나타나지 말라고 하였는데 왜 나타났느냐”라고 하면서 약 10여분 간 주먹과 발로 피해자 공소외 6의 전신을 구타하도록 하였다.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspiredd with Nonindicted 11 and 9 in sequence with Nonindicted 6 on the part of the victim for about three weeks of medical treatment.

2. Defendant 1’s crime;

A. Crimes against the victim non-indicted 10

In order to raise his economic activities and organizational funds after being released from prison, Defendant 1 had the victim Nonindicted 10 Co. 10, a company of Nonindicted 90, a company of the construction of the construction project, access to Nonindicted 10 Co. 10, a company of Nonindicted 10, a company of the organization, and instructed the victim Nonindicted 4, etc., who committed assault and intimidation on May 2006, to force the victim Nonindicted 10, a company of the organization, to take advantage of various interests, etc. from the victim Nonindicted 10.

1) On May 2006, Non-Indicted 4 demanded the Defendant 6, 4, and 3, etc., who are the senior executives organization, to mobilize their respective assistant members pursuant to the orders of Defendant 1 as above, and called up 20 assistant members, including Non-Indicted 13, 59, 149, 67, 66, 150, 84, 24, 15, etc.

이후 같은 날 20:00경 피해자 공소외 10이 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 ‘ ▽▽ ◀◀◀ 부동산’에 있다는 연락을 받고, 위 조직원 20여명을 그곳에 모이게 하여 위세를 보이도록 한 후 불상의 조직원 2명으로 하여금 위 부동산에 들어가 “이 씹할 공소외 10이 누구야, 이리 나와 봐.”라고 소리치고 피해자 공소외 10을 부동산 밖으로 끌고 나와 공소외 4와 피고인 6이 타고 있던 크라이슬러 승용차의 뒷좌석에 태우도록 하였다.

After that, Non-Indicted 4 acted with Non-Indicted 10 of the victim Non-Indicted 10 of the victim as “the victim Non-Indicted 10 of the victim, she can drink, she can drink, and she can have no telephone, and when the victim Non-Indicted 10 of the victim did not have the right to operate his business, he would inflict any harm on his body, etc.

2) On June 2006, Nonindicted 3, who received the order from Defendant 1, instructed Nonindicted 1, who was the subordinate organization of the victim, to terrorism the victim Nonindicted 10, as the victim Nonindicted 10 did not know the business right, etc., even in the threat like the above 1). Nonindicted 1 instructed Nonindicted 27 to dispatch the steering staff, and Nonindicted 5 and Nonindicted 28 were selected.

On June 23, 2006, Defendant 5 and Nonindicted 28 discovered that the victim Nonindicted 10 was driven and driven by Nonindicted 10 from the victim Nonindicted 10’s office underground parking lot in the office building (hereinafter omitted) located in the △△ Si, Nonindicted 5 and Nonindicted 28, among Non-Indicted 10, the victim Nonindicted 10 driven the car (vehicle registration number 3 omitted), and followed that Nonindicted 1 was waiting in the vehicle, and Nonindicted 5 and Nonindicted 28 moved in the front of the said vehicle, with their face covered, thereby impairing the victim Nonindicted 10, who was in the vicinity of the said vehicle, and destroying the repair cost, 13,513,00 won.

3) Thereafter, around the beginning of August 2006, Nonindicted 4 directed the victim Nonindicted 10 Nonindicted 10, who was found in the office of the victim Nonindicted 10 located in △△△ City (hereinafter omitted), to the effect that “The president of the National Assembly would immediately release him from the office, and would have prepared more vehicles than the vehicle on which the President would face, and would be able to bring him out, to the victim Nonindicted 10,000 automobiles at the market price of KRW 260 million from the victim Nonindicted 10, which was issued.”

Accordingly, in collusion with Nonindicted 4 and 3, the Defendant carried a weapon with the victim Nonindicted 10 (vehicle registration number 3 omitted) by carrying it with him to damage the victim Nonindicted 10’s (vehicle registration number 13,513,00 won), and at the same time carried a grandchild, which is a lethal weapon, to carry it with him to commit any harm to his life or body unless the victim Nonindicted 10 did not know the right of business, and got the victim Nonindicted 10, who was frighted, received a car from Nonindicted 10, the market price of KRW 260,000,000 from the victim Nonindicted 10, thereby passing it.

(b) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc.;

피고인은 2006. 8. 26.경부터 2006. 9. 5.경까지 ▣▣시 (이하 생략) 소재 ‘ ☆☆☆☆☆’ 게임장에서, ☆☆☆☆☆ 게임기 60여대를 설치하고, 자신의 하위조직원인 피고인 2를 위 게임장의 명의상 대표자로 등록하고, 공소외 13으로 하여금 위 오락실과 환전소를 관리하도록 하였다.

The non-indicted 13, after inserting 10,00 won in cash into the above machine, had the non-indicted 13 who found the above game room gain a certain score and play the game, and then gain a certain score in the screen to show the same picture or number, and let the above game gain a maximum of 2,00,00 won in addition to the prescribed score when the above game is shown, and then, when the merchandise coupon 1,00 won in face value per 5,00 won is emitted on the above game screen, the money exchange was made in cash after deducting 10% of the money exchange commission from the money exchange station installed near the above game room.

Accordingly, in collusion with Nonindicted 13, the Defendant engaged in speculative activities by allowing customers to take advantage of his speculative gaming machines and to take property benefits in collusion with them.

(c) Offering of bribe;

From February 15, 2008 to February 18, 2008, the defendant was classified as the subject of special guard while living in the safe prison and went out to the outside, and thus, the defendant asked for the provision of convenience to Nonindicted 12 and 12, a correctional officer, who is a correctional officer, who takes full charge of the defendant's custody in the six main premises of the above prison, to 08:00 to 18:30 each day, for the convenience of communicating with the outside.

Pursuant to the above request of the Defendant, Nonindicted 12 made the Defendant communicate 130 times from the beginning of November 2009 to May 201, 2010 via the internal telephone, and made the Defendant communicateed the phone received from Nonindicted 13 to the Defendant on March 22, 2010, and made the Defendant call with Nonindicted 13, etc. over 167 occasions in the above prison to instruct him/her to work as to Nonindicted 6 of the steering staff in his/her half-year period, and let him/her report various pending issues, such as the content of investigation related to the ○○○○m wave, etc. from his/her assistant.

On February 26, 2010, the Defendant had Nonindicted 11 and Nonindicted 13 provide Nonindicted 12 with the amount of entertainment taverns located in the ▽▽△△-si with the foregoing convenience in return for the provision of convenience.

On March 28, 2010, the Defendant issued one eXR movement picture equivalent to KRW 549,000 in the market price to Nonindicted 12 through Nonindicted 11 in return for the provision of the above convenience at a store store located in △△△△ City, via Nonindicted 11, in return for the provision of the above convenience.

Accordingly, in collusion with Nonindicted 11 and 13, the Defendant offered the amount of entertainment to Nonindicted 12 who is a public official, and offered a bribe equivalent to 648,000 won.

[2011Gohap 4]

○ Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Organization and activity of an organization, etc.) against Defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4

1. Each legal statement of the defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4 in part;

1. Each legal statement of the witness Nonindicted 1, 27, 3, 28, 4, 24, 15, 84, and 5

1. Each legal statement of the witness, Nonindicted 88, 89, 56, 30, Defendant 1, 3, 4, 6, and 5

1. Each protocol of examination of the suspect against Defendant 1, 3, 6, and 5 prepared by the prosecution (including each protocol of examination of the suspect against Defendant 6 in the investigation records No. 2011 high-level 38);

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol on Nonindicted 30, 24, 1, 27, 28, 25, 20, 56, 70, 3, 101, 108, 124, and 125

1. Each prosecutor’s statement on Nonindicted 4, 10, and 15

1. Each police interrogation protocol on Nonindicted 121, 31, 59, 25, 92, 10, 110, 151, 16, 111, 17, 18, 33, 99, 56, 57, 21, 22, 23, and 26;

1. The first police interrogation protocol against Nonindicted 67

1. Each police protocol on Nonindicted 14, 7, 19, 8, and 148

1. 검찰 수사보고( 공소외 30의 판결문 사본 첨부, 피의자 공소외 24의 판결문, ‘ ◈◈◈◈수로’ 사건 판결문 등 첨부, 피의자 공소외 56의 판결문 및 출소일자 확인보고, 판결문 및 소송기록 일부첨부보고)

1. Police investigation report (the monetary records of Defendant 1, the account investigation, etc., Defendant 1, the analysis and report on Defendant 1’s monetary records, Defendant 1’s monetary records, Defendant 1’s meeting book, Nonindicted 9’s call records, etc.)

1. Each protocol of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. A copy of the documents, etc. submitted by Defendant 1, the documents, etc. seized in the same correctional institution in 206, the documents, etc. seized in the case of the head of the Si/Gun/Gu Office in 2008, the seizure materials related to the head of the Si/Gun/Gu Office in the place of Si/Gun/Gu in 2010, a copy of each letter,

1. A copy of the judgment of the Suwon District Court (related to elections), a copy of the judgment of the Seoul High Court (95No1535), a copy of the judgment of the Suwon District Court (94Gohap1797, etc.), a copy of the judgment of the Suwon District Court (Non-Indicted 117 and 152);

1. A copy of the specification of transactions, a copy of a check, a vehicle acceptance certificate, a register of automobiles (vehicle registration number 2 omitted), and (vehicle registration number 1 omitted);

1. Attachment of a copy of a photograph, newspaper article, a photograph of a hotel with a large line linen, a new ○○○○ Branch Members, such as a rally, door photograph, etc., to a closure on the Internet screen;

○ Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc. against Defendant 2

1. The defendant 2's partial statement

1. Defendant 1, 6, Nonindicted 3, and 4’s each legal statement

1. Materials related to entertainment rooms;

○ Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) against Defendant 5

1. Defendant 5’s legal statement

1. Each legal statement of the witness Nonindicted 28 and 56

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of suspect examination against Defendant 5;

1. Court rulings (No. 2007Gohap129, etc.);

[2011Gohap 13]

○ Crimes against Non-Indicted 7

1. Each legal statement of the defendant 1 and 3 in part;

1. Each legal statement of the witness Nonindicted 4, 24, and 15

1. Statement made by Non-Indicted 7 in the fourth protocol of the case No. 2010 Godan922 at the Suwon District Court which transferred the witness;

1. Statement of the witness Nonindicted 4 in the 9th and 10th trial records of the instant case

1. Statement of the witness Nonindicted 3 in the 10th trial record of the instant case

1. Statement of the witness Nonindicted 24 in the 11th trial record of the instant case

1. Each statement of the witness Nonindicted 15 and 33 in the 13th trial records of the instant case

1. Part of the witness Nonindicted 92’s statement in the fifteenth trial records of the instant case

1. The prosecutor’s statement concerning Nonindicted 4

1. Statement of opinion, etc.;

1. A criminal investigation report (a copy of official document prepared by Defendant 1 shall be attached);

1. The records of Defendant 1’s preparation;

1. A certificate of deposit and a copy of check;

1. A criminal investigation report among investigation records referred to in subparagraph 4 of Article 2011 (the document of judgment and the attached report on the records of trial, and the pages of Articles 10417 through 10431);

○ Crimes against Non-Indicted 8

1. Each legal statement of the defendant 1 and 3 in part;

1. Each legal statement of the witness Nonindicted 24 and 15

1. Each statement made by Nonindicted 8 and 148 of the 7th protocol of the trial on the case No. 2010 Godan922 in Suwon District Court which had been transferred;

1. Statement of the witness Nonindicted 4 in the 9th and 10th trial records of the instant case

1. Statement of the witness Nonindicted 24 in the 11th trial record of the instant case

1. Each statement made by Nonindicted 15, 33, and 31 of the 13th trial records of the instant case

1. Part of the witness’s statement in the fifteenth trial records of the instant case

1. 수사보고(‘ ◁◁섬유’ 사건 피해차량가액 산정에 대하여)

1. Details certification, vehicle takeover certificates, etc., vehicle registration certificates, and inquiries related to the insured;

1. Investigation report (Attachment to the judgment of the ordinary suspect, Defendant 4, Nonindicted 11, etc.)

○ Crimes against Non-Indicted 6 of the Victim

1. The defendant 3's partial statement

1. Each legal statement of the witness Nonindicted 3 and 27

1. Statement made by Non-Indicted 11 in the 9th protocol of the case No. 2010 Godan922 at the Suwon District Court prior to transfer

1. Statement of the witness Nonindicted 3 in the 10th trial record of the instant case

1. The statement of the witness Nonindicted 6 in the 12th trial record of the instant case

1. Part of the witness Nonindicted 9’s statement in the fourteenth trial records of the instant case

1. A copy of the protocol of interrogation of Nonindicted 11 (No. 5130 to 5174, title 1)

1. A medical certificate;

1. Investigation report (information on identification of the personal information, etc. on the subscribers of Handphones used by Defendant 3);

1. Review of the results of analysis of digital evidence (on-site) regarding organized violence among Nonindicted 9’s call details and investigation records No. 2011No. 4

1. Investigation report (Attachment to the judgment of the ordinary suspect, Defendant 4, Nonindicted 11, etc.)

1. Records of the investigation records of No. 17586, 2010, which were recorded in the horizontal Housing Site Office of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office, No. 17586;

○ Crimes against Non-Indicted 10

1. Each legal statement of the defendant 1 and 4 in part;

1. Each legal statement of the witness, Nonindicted 1, 27, 3, 28, 4, 24, and Defendant 6

1. Statement of Non-Indicted 10 in the fourth protocol of the case No. 2010 Godan922 at the Suwon District Court prior to transfer

1. Statement of the witness Nonindicted 4 in the 9th and 10th trial records of the instant case

1. Statement of the witness Nonindicted 3 in the 10th trial record of the instant case

1. Statement of the witness Nonindicted 24 in the 11th trial record of the instant case

1. Each statement made by the witness Nonindicted 1 and 15 in the 13th trial records of the instant case

1. A copy of the statement prepared by Nonindicted 10 (No. 1, No. 5175, No. 5195), and a copy of the statement prepared by Nonindicted 155 (No. 1, No. 1, No. 1871)

1. The meeting table of the defendant 1;

1. Damage photographs;

1. Investigation report (Attachment to the judgment of the ordinary suspect, Defendant 4, Nonindicted 11, etc.)

1. Relevant data, including Nonindicted 3 and Defendant 5’s interrogation protocol, each prosecutor’s protocol on Nonindicted 4’s interrogation of Nonindicted 3 and Defendant 5, each prosecutor’s protocol on Nonindicted 4, the seizure materials of the Suwon Gan District Office in 2010, Defendant 1 meeting book related to Nonindicted 10’s president, and the record on Nonindicted 1’s telephone use.

○ Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc.

1. The defendant 1 and 2's partial statement

1. Defendant 6, Nonindicted 3, and 4’s each legal statement

1. 판결문( 06고단1203호 ), 단속경위서 등, 압수조서 및 압수목록, ☆☆☆☆☆ 관련사진

○ Bribery

1. Part of the witness Nonindicted 12’s statement in the fifteenth protocol of the 15th protocol of the case No. 2010 Godan922 at the Suwon District Court prior to transfer

1. The statement of the witness Nonindicted 11 in the 9th trial record of the instant case

1. An investigation report (report on users of mobile phones, internal telephone analysis, personal information analysis, specific report on digital evidence analysis of the Ansan prison, analysis report on the telephone details of Nonindicted Party 12, attachment of a petto department store, a golf attached to EXR sales slips, attachment of a note, etc. for which a suspect attempted to destroy evidence, attachment of a note, etc. for which he attempted to destroy evidence, attachment of Defendant 1’s dynamic book, telephone use ledger, etc.);

【Prior Records at the Time of Sales】

[Judgment of the court below]

1. Each criminal record;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of Defendant 2's judgment, attachment of data on the status of personal identification/Admittance, report on the results of confirmation of the previous dispositions, records of the Dong administration, telephone use register of Defendant 1);

1. Daejeon District Court's rulings (207No. 26), election, entertainment room, copy of the Seoul High Court's rulings (86No. 1394), copy of the Supreme Court's rulings (86Do1910), copy of the Suwon District Court's rulings (86No. 31, etc.);

【No. 1 of the Investigation Records No. 2011 Gohap13】

1. Investigation report (report attached to the judgment of the criminal suspect on the defendant 3), investigation report (report attached to the judgment, and page 543 through 5450);

1. Unauthorized report on the disposition, report on the results of confirmation and decision (each three copies); and

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

A. Defendant 1: Article 4(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act [the point of joining an organization of crime, the choice of a limited imprisonment: Provided, That the maximum punishment shall be governed by the main sentence of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 10259, Apr. 15, 2010; hereinafter the same shall apply], Articles 3(1) and 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 257(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of carrying dangerous things), Article 2(2) and (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 350(1) and 30(1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 257(1) and 30(1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 30(1) and 30(1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 257(1) and 30(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 36(1)1) of the Punishment of the Punishment of Violences Act, etc.

(b) Defendant 2: Article 4(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the point of joining a criminal organization), Article 30(1)1 and Article 2(1)2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, Etc., and Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of running a speculative business by using speculative gaming machines, and the choice of imprisonment)

(c) Defendant 3: Articles 4(1)3 (a) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Articles 3(1) and 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Articles 257(1) and 30 (a) of the Criminal Act; Articles 2(2) and (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Articles 350(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 257(1) and 30 (joint conflict; choice of imprisonment); Articles 257(1) and 30 (Appointment of Injury and Selection of Imprisonment) of the Criminal Act

(d) Defendant 4: Article 4(1)2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the point of joining a criminal organization and the selection of a limited term of imprisonment)

(e) Defendant 5: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 260(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of assaulting carrying dangerous objects)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

A. Defendant 1: Article 35 of the Criminal Act (as to the crime of homicide and the crime of offering of bribe in a previous conviction)

B. Defendant 2: Article 35 of the Criminal Act; proviso of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act

C. Defendant 3: Article 35 of the Criminal Act

1. Handling and mitigation of concurrent crimes;

A. Defendant 1: The latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act [the punishment of violence, etc. (the composition and activity of an organization, etc.), the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the crime of causing injury to a group, deadly weapon, etc.), the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the crime of causing damage to a group, deadly weapon, etc.), the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the crime of causing damage to a deadly weapon, etc.), the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the crime of causing damage to a group, deadly weapon, etc.), the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc. (the punishment of a group, deadly weapon, etc.), and the violation of the Public Official Election

(b) Defendant 2: the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act [the punishment shall be mitigated pursuant to the latter part of Article 39(1) and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act in consideration of equity in cases where each judgment is rendered concurrently with the crime for which each judgment becomes final and conclusive, such as a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc

(c) Defendant 3: The latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act [the punishment of violence, etc. (the composition and activity of an organization, etc.), the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act), the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act) and the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) for which judgment becomes final, the crime of injury and the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc., for which judgment becomes final, the punishment shall be mitigated pursuant to the latter part of

(d) Defendant 4: The latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act (the composition and activities of organizations, etc.) shall be mitigated pursuant to the latter part of Article 39(1) and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act in consideration of equity between the crime of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the composition and activities of organizations, etc.) and the crime of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) for which judgment becomes final

(e) Defendant 5: The latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act [the punishment of violence against groups, deadly weapons, etc.] shall be mitigated pursuant to the latter part of Article 39(1) and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act in consideration of equity in cases where a judgment is rendered concurrently with the crime for which a final judgment has become final and conclusive and the crime for which a final judgment has become final and conclusive;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

A. Defendant 1: the first sentence of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2, and 50 of the Criminal Act [the aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes provided for in the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. (Composition and Activities of Organizations, etc.), Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily, etc.), Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Joint Assault), Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act) (Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act)], violation of the Regulation of Speculative Acts, etc. and the Act on Special Cases concerning the Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, etc. (Formation of Organizations, etc.

(b) Defendant 2: the aggravated punishment of concurrent crimes within the scope of the sum of the long-term punishments of the crimes of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. (Organization and Activity of Organizations, etc.) with heavier punishment under the former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act

(c) Defendant 3: The aggravated punishment of concurrent crimes provided for in the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act (the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the composition and activity of an organization, etc.), violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act) and violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the crime of collective intimidation), and

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant 5: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do

[2011Gohap 4]

1. Whether the defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4 had the substance of a crime organization at the time of joining the ○○ wave

(a) Applicable legal principles;

In light of the fact that a group of violence has different characteristics of a crime group and it seems that the continuous association as an organization is somewhat unstable due to its characteristics, and even if the command system seems not to be clear inside and outside of the country, the relationship among its members was assembled by the group in accordance with the special rules, and the power as an organization or group has been exercised, the group aimed at committing a crime provided for in Article 4 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act shall be deemed to have a minimum common system that leads the group or maintains internal order, and the organization can be established and continued in a variety of forms, and so long as the organization can be established and continued in a variety of forms, it does not necessarily require a certain procedure such as the organization formation or joining (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3787, Nov. 29, 2007).

B. Determination

As evidence consistent with this part of the facts charged, Nonindicted 3, 4, 1, and Nonindicted 27, which are Nonindicted 3, and Nonindicted 27, who were the executives members of the ○○○○ branch, have respective statements. The contents of the statements are very specific and consistent, reasonably explained about the situation before and after each accession to the judgment, and sufficiently supported the credibility of the statements by other assistant members' statements (at least a certain part of the statements mentioned above, there are some parts that are not inconsistent with the size of each of the statements mentioned above, but this is merely a scarcity, and it is difficult to deny the credibility of the statements, considering the circumstances such as the fact that the memory goes after the lapse of time).

위 각 진술 및 판시 각 증거를 종합하여 보면, ① 피고인 6은 1993. 12.경 당시 ▽▽지역 최대의 폭력조직인 △△△△파를 제거하고 나아가 ◐◐지역 폭력조직의 통합을 목적으로 하는 범죄단체인 ○○○파를 조직하였고, 이러한 범죄단체 조직을 이유로 처벌을 받고 1999년 출소한 후 ▽▽지역 사창가인 속칭 ‘ □□’에서 활동하고 있던 공소외 1 등의 세력을 규합하고 적극적으로 신규조직원을 모집하여 세력을 확장하는 등으로 ○○○파 조직을 재정비한 사실, ② 그리하여 ○○○파가 2001년 초경부터 본격적으로 △△△△파와 대립할 수 있을 정도의 규모가 되면서 피고인 6은 공소외 1에게 “전국에서 다 알아주는 선배( 피고인 1을 지칭)를 내가 선배로 모시고 있으니 자부심을 가지라”고 독려하는 한편, “ ▽▽에서 △△△△파를 보면 피하지 말고 싸우라”고 하면서 “항상 흉기를 들고 다니면서 ( △△△△파와의) 전쟁을 준비하라”고 지시하였고, 공소외 1은 피고인 6의 위와 같은 독려와 지시를 공소외 30, 56, 28 등 하위조직원들에게 말이나 행동을 통해 직·간접적으로 숙지시킴으로써 조직원들의 결속을 공고히 한 사실, ③ 이에 따라 공소외 1을 중심으로 한 ○○○파 조직원들은 2001년부터 2005년까지 사이에 판시 제7의 가. 1)항 기재와 같이 ‘ □□’의 이권개입과 관련하여 △△△△파 조직원들과 잦은 마찰을 일으키고, 판시 제7의 다, 라항 기재와 같이 조직적인 차원에서 갈취 범행 및 청부폭력 범행을 저지르는 등 활발하게 활동한 사실, ④ 공소외 1 등 ○○○파 조직원들은 건축자재상을 운영하는 피고인 6으로부터 조직활동에 필요한 자금을 받기도 하였고, ‘ □□’ 사창가에서 이른바 ‘삼촌’으로 일하면서 사창가 업주들로부터 용돈을 받고 △△△△파에 적대적인 업소로부터 돈을 걷는 등으로 활동자금을 마련하였으며, 2003년경 폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반죄로 구속 기소되었을 때에는 피고인 6과 공소외 3 등으로부터 변호사비용을 지원받기도 한 사실, ⑤ 공소외 1 등 ○○○파 조직원들은 피고인 6 등으로부터 경비를 지원받아 판시와 같이 제부도에서 ‘ △△△△파를 박살내자’라는 결의를 다지는 단합대회를 하고, 1999년 말경부터 2000년 말경까지 ▽▽시 (이하 생략)에 하위조직원들의 조직생활을 위한 숙소를 마련하기도 하였던 사실, ⑥ 피고인 6은 ▽▽ 지역의 속칭 ‘건달’로서 그 인지도가 높았던 피고인 1의 세력을 이용하고자 공소외 1과 함께 피고인 1의 면회를 다니면서 그를 ‘큰형님’으로 모시고 조직운영 및 활동에 관한 조언을 들었고, 공소외 1은 피고인 1의 2003년 귀휴 이후로 피고인 1의 지시에 따라 공소외 3을 ‘형님’으로 모시면서 속칭 조직생활을 하였으며, 공소외 3은 피고인 1을 면회하면서 그로부터 ‘애들이 얼마나 있느냐’, ‘잘 데리고 있어라’는 말을 들었고, 특히 2006년 귀휴 행사 이전의 면회 시에는 조직운영을 그것밖에 못하냐며 핀잔을 들은 적도 있는 등 당시 ○○○파의 수괴 및 간부급 조직원들은 모두 피고인 1의 일정한 영향력 하에 활동하였던 사실, ⑦ ○○○파 조직원들이 2003년경 폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반죄로 구속되어 처벌받고 난 이후로 공소외 51, 52, 53, 81, 37 등 일부 조직원들이 ○○○파에서 탈퇴하고, 그 무렵 공소외 1이 공소외 3을 ‘형님’으로 모시게 되면서 ○○○파의 실질적인 수괴가 피고인 6에서 공소외 3으로 변경되는 등 조직원들의 구성 및 통솔체계에 다소 변경이 생기기는 하였지만, 공소외 1, 30, 56, 9, 58, 57, 27, 94 등 다수의 조직원들은 ○○○파에 남아서 공소외 3의 통솔 하에 공소외 1을 중심으로 활동하였던 사실, ⑧ 그러던 중 △△△△파 조직원이었던 피고인 4 및 공소외 48 살인사건의 공범이었던 공소외 4와 피고인 2가 2005년 말경부터 피고인 1의 면회를 다니면서 그로부터 지시를 받고, 공소외 3, 피고인 6과 어울리기 시작하면서, ○○○파는 외부세력의 영입으로 그 세력이 더욱 확장된 사실을 인정할 수 있다.

In light of this factual relationship, ○○○○m, which is a criminal organization organized by Defendant 6, has been somewhat unstable due to changes in the actual status between Defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4, which was first organized from the end of December 1993 to the end of 2005 to June 2006, in which Defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4 joined ○○○○○m, and was temporarily subject to reorganization. However, it is reasonable to deem that ○○m, which is a collective body organized by Defendant 6, has maintained the substance as a criminal organization, with a minimum leading system that leads the organization or maintains internal order under the common purpose of seeking economic benefits by taking part in various interests by taking the initiative of △△△△△△△m in the ▽▽ region and by taking the initiative of the violent world.

2. Whether the defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4 has joined the ○○m wave

(a) Applicable legal principles;

Even though the organization and joining act of a criminal organization itself constitutes an element of a crime requiring strict certification, it is common sense that it is conducted in extreme corruption in a situation where it is difficult to identify the outside due to the nature of the act, and once a member becomes a member, withdrawal is not free, and it is extremely difficult to expect direct physical evidence or witness's existence because there are many cases of cruel retaliation against a deserter, and it is extremely difficult to expect the existence of a witness. Thus, the formation and joining time of the organization can be reasonably determined based on normal empirical rules by comprehensively taking into account various indirect evidence, such as the personal relation of the members, the mode of ordinary conduct, and the development of a criminal act conducted by the members, barring special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 200Do4370, Dec. 27, 200).

B. Whether Defendant 1 was admitted to the ○○○ wave

Article 4 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act refers to a person who directs and leads the activities of an organization as the head of the head of the relevant criminal organization. Even if the person does not directly take charge of the general direction of the members of the organization in front, he/she constitutes a person who directs the activities of an organization through an intermediary officer who directs all organizational activities in the behind, or directs and supervises the employees of the horse group (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Do1049, Jun. 29, 2001, etc.).

According to the statements by the assent of each of the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Nonindicted 3, and 4 with respect to this case, prior to the temporary exercise on or before February 2006, Defendant 1 practically directed ○○○○m through Defendant 6, Nonindicted 3, and Nonindicted 1, through interview with Defendant 2, Nonindicted 4, and Nonindicted 4. The force was expanded through the interview with Defendant 2, Nonindicted 4, and Nonindicted 4. On the temporary exercise on February 2006, 2006, Defendant 1 joined ○○○mp in the form of its reasoning by showing that ○○○○mpum is the "the ○○mp" of ○○mp., and the credibility of the above statements can be acknowledged, in full view of all the circumstances, such as personal relations of the members at the time of joining the ○○○mp., and the development of law by the members, etc., conducted by the members. Accordingly, there is no sufficient room for the deliberation to prove that Defendant 1 joined the temporary crime group leader.

① In light of the fact that Nonindicted 4’s statement at the time of the temporary release event was made to the effect that “○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○6 of the Investigation Record No. 5478 of February 206, 206, including Nonindicted 6 Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 6 of the △○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○6 of the investigation record) was an employee of △△○○○○○○○○○.

② Nonindicted 3 made a statement consistent with the above statement to the effect that Defendant 1 became aware of the fact that Nonindicted 3 had contacted Defendant 1 before the temporary exercise on February 2, 2006, and that Defendant 1 had been aware of Defendant 2 as ○○○○○m. After the temporary exercise on February 2006, Nonindicted 24 and 15, who was a member of the ○○○○m union after the temporary exercise on board, came to know of Defendant 1’s actual two items of ○○○m union. Nonindicted 15 and 88, who was an employee of the ○○○○m union, made a statement in full compliance with the above statement to the effect that Defendant 1 had been directly exempted from Defendant 1 in this court. Accordingly, in full view of these statements, Defendant 1 became aware of the direct exercise of the ○○m union’s influence on the temporary exercise on the part of ○○○.

③ Nonindicted 3 made a statement in this court to the effect that, immediately after Defendant 1’s temporary exercise on February 2, 2006, Nonindicted 3 collected ○○○○○ staff and Defendant 4’s △△△△△△△ staff, and arranged the mutual relationship between the conciliation staff by providing her flock with the former △△△△ staff. Nonindicted 28’s statements in this court, and Nonindicted 30’s statements at the prosecution (201 senior 4 page 624 of the investigation records) are consistent with the above statement of Nonindicted 3, 206, and Nonindicted 3’s statements at the prosecution (201 senior 4 page 6624 of the investigation records).

④ From this Court to February 2006, Nonindicted 3 and 4 used the name of Defendant 1 and Nonindicted 3, 4, Defendant 2, 4, and 6 to be “skened” or “mar” before the temporary release. Defendant 1 made a statement to the effect that, after the said temporary release event, he had his name “smeed” for himself, Nonindicted 3, etc. as “president,” and that he made his superior relationship between himself and Nonindicted 3, etc., and made it clear that he had his superior relationship with the executives and staff, and made the system more solid, such as the parallel status of the above executives and staff, which correspond to the order and direction of ○○○○○’s sexual wave. In addition, Nonindicted 30 also made a statement to the effect that Defendant 1, who had been “smeed” from the prosecution of Korea, referred to as “smeeded,” and that he also made the said statement to the effect that he would be ○○○○ et al., 628.

⑤ 공소외 3, 4는 이 법정에서 피고인 1이 2006. 2. 귀휴행사 이후 ○○○파 조직을 병렬적 라인으로 나누고 공소외 3, 4, 피고인 6, 4를 각 라인별 두목으로 정하여 그들에게 지시를 내리는 방식으로 ○○○파 조직 전체를 장악하였고, 각 라인별 두목들 위주로 구성된 일명 ‘사장단회의’라는 ○○○파 간부회의를 열게 하여 판시와 같은 테러 및 갈취 범행 이외에도 오락실을 운영하고 2006년 동시지방선거에 개입하는 등 조직차원의 활동을 체계적으로 할 수 있도록 조직을 정비하였다는 취지로 일치하여 진술하고 있는바, 피고인 6의 검찰에서의 진술(2011년 형제3778호 수사기록 중 제11079면)이 이에 부합하고, 공소외 27도 이 법정에서 피고인 1로부터, 일본에 ∇∇∇∇∇∇라는 조직이 있는데 위 조직은 계열을 나누어 한쪽 계열의 조직원들이 처벌받더라도 나머지 계열의 조직원들은 처벌받지 않고 계속 활동할 수 있도록 함으로써 일본 최고의 조직이 되었다면서 자신도 출소하면 조직을 그렇게 만들겠다고 하는 말을 들었고, 2005년 말부터 2006년 말까지 사이에 ○○○파가 라인별로 연락체계를 갖추었으며, 피고인 4, 6, 3과 공소외 4, 3이 ○○○파 간부회의를 통하여 이야기를 나눈 후에 하위조직원들에게 지시가 내려왔다고 진술함으로써 이에 부합하는 취지로 진술했으며, 2010년 수원지검 평택지청 압수자료 중 피고인 1의 2006. 8. 14.자 서신에 의하면, 피고인 1은 같은 날 공소외 4에게 “앞으로는 모든 임원들이 더 자주 모여서 사소한 일이라도 모두 적극적으로 임하여 상의를 한 뒤 처리하는 시스템으로 움직여주게. 곧 합류할 ▲▲ 최사장까지!”라는 내용의 서신을 보낸 것으로 보이므로, 피고인 1이 2006. 2. 귀휴행사 이후 위와 같은 방식으로 ○○○파 조직을 장악하고 체계를 정비하였다는 점에 관한 정황증거가 충분하다.

⑥ At this court’s temporary release on February 2006, Nonindicted 4 and Nonindicted 3 made a statement to the effect that Defendant 1 specifically instructed each other’s two items of Raphones to the effect that he could not refuse Defendant 1’s instructions. Defendant 6 also called the prosecutor’s office to confirm the content of Defendant 1’s call at the time. Defendant 6 also called the prosecutor’s office to her own and Nonindicted 3, Defendant 2, and Defendant 4 on a daily basis. Defendant 1 could not have known each other of the instructions, and Defendant 1 could not have known each other of the instructions. Defendant 1 did not act in accordance with Defendant 1’s unilateral instructions (No. 7586 of the investigation records No. 2011, No. 3788).

7. Nonindicted 3 collected 4 00 p.m. executives from 00 p.m. to 5 p.m. 20 p.m. (hereinafter “Nonindicted 2, 806 p.m.”). Nonindicted 4 made a statement to 30 p.m. 5 p.m. (hereinafter “Nonindicted 3m. 1m. 4m. 8m. 6m. 8m. 6m. 8m. 6m. 8m. 1m.) that Defendant 1 had 8m. 1m. (hereinafter “Nonindicted 3m. 4m. 6m. 8m. 8m. 6m. 8m. 8m. 1m. 6m. 8m. 6m. 8m. 1m. 6m. 8m. 1m. 6m. 1m.) that Nonindicted 3m. 1m. 3m. 3m. 8m. 1m. 20m. 3m. 3m.

⑧ 공소외 4는 이 법정에서 2006. 2.경부터 △△△△파의 수괴인 공소외 5를 테러하기 위하여 2006. 3. 초까지 한달간 6, 7회 정도 자신과 공소외 3, 피고인 4, 6이 모여서 ○○○파 간부회의를 열었고 각자의 역할분담에 관하여 회의한 결과를 피고인 1에게 보고하고 지시를 받은 다음, 판시 제7의 가. 2)항 기재와 같이 피고인 4의 하위조직원인 공소외 13 등으로 하여금 회칼 등 흉기를 들고 공소외 5를 찾아다니게 하고, 공소외 3, 1의 하위조직원인 피고인 5 등이 야구방망이를 들고 공소외 5를 찾아다니도록 하였으며, 언론과 수사기관에 공소외 5의 범죄혐의를 제보하기도 하였다고 진술하였는데, 공소외 3, 1, 27, 28, 88의 각 이 법정에서의 진술과 피고인 6, 5에 대한 각 검찰 피의자신문조서의 기재가 위 진술에 부합하고, 피고인 1이 공소외 4에게서 보고받은 것을 그대로 적었다는 메모[ 2011고합4호 수사기록 중 수사보고( 피고인 1의 자필서류등 첨부)의 제8869 내지 8871면]에는 ‘3/3일 공소외 5의 건 상황, 애들 공소외 5를 압박, 공소외 5 도주, 공소외 5 인맥 수원 남문 / 조암 / 서울 이리 배차장 식구 30여명 내려 보냄 - 모두 되돌려 보냄. 공소외 5 - 도경 수사대 동시에 보냄. 객지 애들과 지역 애들 전쟁시킨 뒤 모두 보내려 한 것임. 그 의도를 간파하고 효과적 대처함. 상호 힘 실어주기 위하여 3일 ~ 4일 새벽 사이에 피고인 5 식구 40명 대기, ▲▲ 20명 대기, 천안 20명 대기, ▣▣·★★ 20명 대기, 서울에서 50명 출발 ⇒ 애들에게 세 확인시킨 뒤 해산! 피고인 5- 그 밑의 애들 자신감 확보. 그 식구 내에서 상징적 사건. 여론/ 공소외 5 식구 내에서 축출- 도피 개망신! 다음 주 - 공소외 5의 건 ○○일보 기사화, 세금체납 후 각종 이권에 개입, 호화생활, 경매비리건 고발! 도 형기대 대장 새로 취임. 그 라인과 직접 연결됨. 기사 나간 뒤에 여러 가지 엮어서 관작업 시작될 것임. 현재 중국에서 킬러 들어와 있음. 공소외 162 도피 파악되면 바로 작업될 것임. 이 일을 시작한 이유는 내가 나가서 이런 일이 벌어지면 귀찮은 일이 생길 것이고 내 활동에 제약을 받게 될 것이 우려되어서임. 이로써 지역 접수는 90% 마무리됨. 나머지 공소외 162 잔당 핵심 2명 축출 후 모두 나누어서 흡수할 것임’이라고 그 범행의 경위 및 목적, 범행의 파급효과, 향후 계획 등에 관하여 매우 구체적으로 기재되어 있어 이 또한 공소외 4의 진술에 부합하는바, 위와 같은 증거를 종합하여 보면, 피고인 1은 귀휴행사 무렵인 2006. 2.부터 △△△△파를 물리치고 평택 지역의 폭력조직을 통합한다는 ○○○파의 목적을 달성하기 위하여, ○○○파 간부급 조직원들과 공모하여 △△△△파의 수괴인 공소외 5를 제거하는 범행에 관하여 치밀하게 준비하였고, 이를 실행하는 과정에서 ○○○파 조직원들을 전체적으로 동원하였음을 알 수 있다.

⑨ 공소외 3의 이 법정 및 검찰에서의 진술( 2011고합4호 수사기록 중 제8003, 8004면)에 의하면, 조직 운영자금을 만들기 위하여 피고인 1은 귀휴행사 직후인 2006. 4. 20.경 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 건물 1층에 있는 ☆☆☆☆☆ 게임장 일명 ‘ ■■■ 매장’의 지분 중 45%를 인수하여 2006. 4. 21.경부터 2006. 7. 20.까지 위 게임장을 운영하였는데, 공소외 4와 피고인 2가 공소외 36으로부터 오락실 인수자금을 조달받았고, 공소외 3이 위 오락실에 24시간 상주하면서 관리하였으며, 위 게임장의 환전소를 통하여 얻은 수입은 조직자금으로 사용하기로 하여 실제로 피고인 1의 지시를 받아 환전소 수입금 중 500만 원을 공소외 1에게, 500만 원을 공소외 4에게 교부하여 준 적이 있다는 것이고, 공소외 1, 27, 4, 15, 88의 각 이 법정에서의 진술이 공소외 3의 위 진술에 부합하는바, 이에 2006년 안동교도소 압수자료( 2011고합4호 수사기록 중 제8772~9335면), 대전지방법원 판결문( 2007고합26호 등 선거, 오락실)의 각 기재 등을 더하여 보면, 피고인 1은 ○○○파의 조직자금을 운용하기 위하여 사행성 유기기구를 이용한 게임장을 운영하였다고 볼 수 있다.

⑩ 판시 각 증거에 의하면, 피고인 1은 피고인 4로부터 공소외 1이 2006년 봄경 △△△△파 조직원인 공소외 60을 몰래 만나 △△△△파로 넘어가려 한다는 보고를 받고는 ○○○파 간부회의를 통하여 공소외 1을 테러하라고 지시한 사실, 피고인 1은 2009년경 공소외 3의 하위조직원이었다가 공소외 3, 27, 87로부터 소외당하여 따로 생활을 하고 있던 공소외 56, 9, 58, 57이 자신에게 면회를 오자 그들에게 피고인 3의 하위조직원으로 생활하라고 지시한 사실, 피고인 1은 2009년경 자신의 범죄사실을 수사기관에 신고하려고 하는 공소외 4와 만난다는 이유로 공소외 3을 ○○○파 조직에서 배제하려 하면서, 공소외 27, 87 등 공소외 3의 하위조직원들로 하여금 공소외 3의 면회를 다니지 말라고 하고 자신이 출소할 때까지 ▲▲파 공소외 72의 하위조직원으로 생활하라고 지시한 사실, 피고인 1은 2009년경 공소외 6 또한 공소외 4를 면회다닌다는 이유로 피고인 3에게 공소외 6을 폭행하도록 지시한 사실을 각 인정할 수 있는바, 위와 같은 사실에 비추어 볼 때 피고인 1은 자신을 배신하거나 ○○○파를 탈퇴하려는 조직원들에게 보복을 가할 것을 지시하였고, ○○○파 조직원들을 관리하는 데에 직접적으로 관여한 것으로 보인다.

C. Whether Defendant 2 was admitted to the ○○ wave

Around February 2006, when similar time to Defendant 2, Non-Indicted 4 entered ○○○m, he had Defendant 2 with Defendant 4 from the end of 2005 at this court and prosecutorial office, and Defendant 2 had her interview from Defendant 1 at first time, and then Defendant 1 stated to the effect that Defendant 2 participated in Defendant 1’s temporary event on February 1, 2006 and participated in ○○○m. Thus, considering that Non-Indicted 3’s legal statement to the effect that Defendant 2 participated in ○○○mmion at a wharf level after the temporary exercise, and that Non-Indicted 1’s legal statement to the effect that Defendant 2 was she was she, as the organization of ○○mion after Defendant 2’s temporary exercise and that it was reasonable to prove that Defendant 1 was she was she, as the organization of ○○○m, through the aforementioned reasonable evidence and evidence that Defendant 2 participated in ○○○m.

① According to the statements made by Nonindicted 3 and 4 in this court, Defendant 2 attended the meeting of ○○○ Executive Officers from February 2006 to March 4, 2006 at the meeting of ○○○○○ Executive Officers from March 2006 and had the intention to win the election of Nonindicted 156 and 159 at the simultaneous local election in 2006. As the above executive members’ statement was made by Nonindicted 4, Defendant 2 does not seem to be able to attend the meeting solely on the ground that there was a relationship of relationship with Defendant 1.

② Defendant 2 also attended Defendant 1’s temporary event on February 2, 2006, which was led by Defendant 6 and 4, and after the event was completed, Defendant 32, who participated in the above event, and was found to have provided drinking in danran. According to Nonindicted 4’s legal statement, Nonindicted 4 and Defendant 2, who was given convenience to Defendant 1 as a correctional officer upon Defendant 1’s instruction, was in contact with Nonindicted 32, who was given convenience to Defendant 1, in danran, Sana, and Mana. In light of these statements, if Defendant 2 participated in the above temporary event on the basis of a pro rata relation with Defendant 1, as alleged by Defendant 2, he did not have any reason to conclude such contact with Nonindicted 32 as above.

③ According to the consistent statements made by Nonindicted 4 at this Court and prosecutor’s office (in particular, Articles 7041 through 7044 of the investigation records No. 2015-4), Nonindicted 4 stated to the effect that, around April 2006, Nonindicted 4 delivered largephones prepared with Defendant 1’s instructions to the wharf level organization to Defendant 2, 6, 4 and 3, Nonindicted 13, 153, 160, 156, 159, and that the above persons were key parties to telephone or waiting daily from Defendant 1. Since Defendant 1 also took charge of the role of election against Defendant 2, Defendant 1 appears to have carried out largephones, and Defendant 1 appears to have carried out such an election campaign with Defendant 2’s instructions, including the Internet home page, and Defendant 1 appears to have carried out an election campaign with Defendant 854, 200-1, Defendant 1’s Internet home page, etc., and Defendant 1 appears to have carried out an election campaign.

④ According to the consistent statement of Nonindicted 30’s investigative agency, which is the lower organization of ○○○ branch, and in this court (in particular, 6631 to 6633 of the investigation records of 2011 Manhap4), Defendant 2, Nonindicted 3, 4, and Defendant 6 were instructed from the places where Defendant 2, Nonindicted 3, and Defendant 6 gather to “studio” on the “studio” on the part of New Co., Ltd., and Defendant 4 and Nonindicted 29, and Defendant 2 took part in the process of the mother of ○○○○○○ branch, which is favorable to ○○○○ branch.

⑤ 피고인 2는 이 법원 2006고합76호 로 2006. 5. 31.에 실시된 제4회 전국동시지방선거에서 ▶▶도의회 의원선거에 후보자가 되려고 하는 공소외 161을 당선되지 못하게 할 목적으로, 공소외 161을 비방하는 글을 동아누리 인터넷 사이트(사이트명 생략)에 게시하였다는 범죄사실로 벌금 300만 원을 선고받았는바, 피고인 2가 ○○○파 조직원으로서가 아니라면 ○○○파 조직원들에 의한 위 범행에 가담할 만한 별다른 이유가 없다.

D. Whether Defendant 3 was admitted to the ○○ wave

According to the statements made in this court by Nonindicted 4, Defendant 3 entered Nonindicted 4 down to May 2006, and became a member of the organization of ○○○○m, and Nonindicted 4 made a statement to the effect that Nonindicted 24, 15, 33, and 11, etc., who were subordinate officers of Nonindicted 4, after being detained on or around December 2006. Since each of the legal statements made in Nonindicted 3, 27, 24, and 15 complies with the above statements made in Nonindicted 4, it is difficult to reject the credibility of the above statements only with the partial statements made in Nonindicted 1, 56, and 30, and considering the following circumstances that can be known through each of the evidence in the judgment, it is sufficient to prove that Defendant 3 was admitted to ○○○m in a reasonable manner.

① around June 2010, Defendant 3 and Nonindicted 4 mobilized Nonindicted 24, 15, and 9, who were Defendant 1 and Nonindicted 4, and committed the crime identical to the criminal facts stated in 201 high-level 13. However, if Defendant 3 is not an organization member of ○○○m, there is no particular reason to take part in each of the above crimes without a direct interest with Defendant 3.

② On February 2, 2006, Nonindicted 30 made a statement at an investigative agency that, one of the major changes in the ○○○○○m wave organization, Defendant 3, who was only the friendship of Nonindicted 3, went to the outside of the Gu and was living (Article 624 through 6625 out of the investigation records No. 201Gam4). Nonindicted 24 and 15, from this court to this court, made a large amount of Section 3 with Defendant 4, along with Nonindicted 4, at the ▽▽△ City (hereinafter omitted) restaurant around June 2006. From that time, Nonindicted 3, along with Defendant 3, made a statement that he had been living in the ○○○○m wave organization with Nonindicted 4, and in particular, according to Nonindicted 15’s legal statement, at that time, Nonindicted 15 et al. made a statement from Defendant 3 to the lower ○○○○○’s 25th day from that time.

③ Nonindicted 4 and 27 stated in this court that Defendant 3 participated in the ○○○○ Executive Officers’ Meeting several times after the completion of the local election in 2006. This is consistent with Nonindicted 4, 24, and 15, each of the statements made by Nonindicted 4 and 15, when Defendant 3 was detained after Nonindicted 4 was detained on December 2006.

④ According to the statements made by Nonindicted 24 and 15, Defendant 3 lived together at the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was prepared by Nonindicted 4 (hereinafter omitted). After Nonindicted 24, Defendant 3 served as the head of the said lodging place. In particular, according to the statements made by Nonindicted 15, Defendant 3, based on Nonindicted 15, the extension of Nonindicted 3’s subordinate staff, including Nonindicted 15, was the extension of Nonindicted 3, thereby having Defendant 3 keep the night room and the blade, etc. in the said lodging place.

⑤ In this court, Nonindicted 1 stated in this court that Defendant 3 3 did not come to congested with Nonindicted 1, and that “ Nonindicted 3 did so. Nonindicted 3 was working or she was forced to take over Nonindicted 1 to the police by cutting off Nonindicted 3, and Nonindicted 30 stated to the effect that Nonindicted 1 was forced to take over the police. Nonindicted 30 appears to have been detained by Nonindicted 56, 58, 9, and 57, which Nonindicted 1 could have come to come to a systematic life with Defendant 3 while Nonindicted 1 went to the police at the police meeting of Defendant 3. In light of the investigation records, Nonindicted 56, 58, 9, and 57, which Nonindicted 1 could have come to move to an organizational life with Defendant 3 at the time of Defendant 3’s release on September 209, 209, and she was detained by Defendant 3 and was under the influence of Defendant 3 (Article 4981 among investigation records).

E. Whether Defendant 4 was admitted to the ○○○ wave

In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, even if the statutory penalty is more than the “syption” of the crime organization, even though it does not reach the direction or command of all organizational activities in the hinterland or in the front, such as the “syption,” it shall include cases where the crime organization is affiliated with the criminal organization and uses the criminal organization by convening staff whenever necessary in the behind of the crime organization, and supports the criminal organization by means of tangible and intangible methods, such as economic support, consultation on the organization and activities, and encouragement of the members.

Nonindicted 3 and 4 consistently made a statement at this court and prosecutorial office to the effect that Defendant 4 joined ○○○○○○○○ by taking part in Nonindicted 27, 1, 28, 5, 84, and 6’s statement to the effect that Defendant 4 took part in the above ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ level.

① Even according to Defendant 4’s statement, Defendant 4 appeared to have been present at the △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△ on February 206, 206. Defendant 4, who was composed of Nonindicted 59 and other subordinate staff members of the △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△, during the instant temporary event where Defendant 1 was boomed by the head of the ○○○○○○○△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△’s testimony, and Nonindicted 31, upon Nonindicted 4’s temporary release from the △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△○’s testimony, was merely an attempt to reduce Defendant 1’s temporary release and conferment of degree, and Nonindicted 4, who was detained by Nonindicted 2, 2006.

② According to Nonindicted 3 and 4’s orders issued by Defendant 1 at this court and prosecutor’s office in 2006, Nonindicted 29, a opposing party to ○○○○○○○ Pool for the election of Nonindicted 156 candidates, Nonindicted 3 and 4 opened a meeting of ○○○○ Pool executives who gather from public office. Nonindicted 30’s consistent statement (in particular, 631 through 633 out of investigation records No. 2011 and 4, 663) at the same time as Nonindicted 6, 2, and 4’s “Nonindicted 3 and 4,” Nonindicted 29, a representative of △△△△△△△△△’s office, who was friendly with ○○○○○○○○○ ○○ Pool, was 29, a 29-day group of female public officials, and was able to take part in the investigation, and that Nonindicted 4 and 3’s 29-day, a 200-day-day instruction.”

③ According to Non-Indicted 3 and 4’s consistent statements (in particular, Articles 7041 through 7044 of the investigation records No. 2011Gohap4) and Defendant 6’s statements at the prosecutor’s office (No. 11081 of the investigation records No. 3778 of 201), Non-Indicted 4 delivered largephones prepared under Defendant 1’s instructions around April 2006 to Defendant 2, 6, 4, and 3, Non-Indicted 13, 153, 160, 156, and 159, the above persons were key parties who need to receive or wait daily from Defendant 1, and Defendant 4 also received the above largephones as key parties.

④ 피고인 4의 진술에 의하더라도 ○○○파 조직원들에 의한 공소외 90 주식회사의 대표이사인 공소외 10에 대한 공갈범행이 이루어진 ▽▽ ◀◀◀ 부동산에 자신의 수하에 있던 공소외 59, 67 등 조직원들을 데리고 갔다는 것이고, 공소외 4, 3은 이 법정 및 검찰에서 일관되게 피고인 4가 피고인 1의 지시를 받아 공소외 10이 시행하고 있던 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 아파트 건설사업에 관한 상가분양계약, 고철수집 등 이권사업을 실시하여 수익을 얻었다는 취지로 진술하고 있으며, 피고인 1의 동정기록부, 전화사용대장 등 첨부보고( 2011고합4호 수사기록 중 제10305 내지 10340면)의 기재 등을 종합하여 보면, 피고인 4는 위 사업을 진행하는 과정에서 피고인 1과 통화하면서 그 추진상황에 관하여 상세히 보고하고 지시를 받는 등으로, 피고인 1의 지시에 따라 이루어진 ○○○파의 위 공갈범행에 매우 깊이 관여하였던 것으로 보인다.

⑤ 피고인 1, 6과 공소외 3, 4는 이 법정에서 일치하여 피고인 4도 피고인 6, 2 및 공소외 3, 4와 더불어 ▣▣시 (이하 생략)에 있는 ‘ ☆☆☆☆☆’ 게임장의 지분 중 10%를 받기로 하였다고 진술하고 있는바, 피고인 4는 ○○○파의 수익사업에도 관여하였던 것으로 보인다.

④ According to Nonindicted 4’s statement in this court and Nonindicted 3’s statement at the prosecutor’s office (Article 809 through 8011 of the investigation records No. 2015 Ma4), Defendant 1 instructed Defendant 4 to attack Nonindicted 1, who received from Defendant 4 that Nonindicted 1 would go beyond 60, a cause of the △△△△△△△△△△△ in spring around 2006, she would go beyond 106, and Defendant 4 was present at the ○○○○○○ Executive Directors in accordance with this direction, and Nonindicted 84 also decided to attack Nonindicted 1 in accordance with the decision of the ○○○○○○○○○ Executive Directors, and Defendant 4 was also at the place where the above terrorist was gathered. In light of such a statement, it appears that the internal conflict between Defendant 4 and the ○○○○○ executive members was also related to the internal conflict.

[2011Gohap 13]

1. Crimes against the victim Nonindicted 7

A. Whether Defendant 3, who was a dangerous object, had the victim Nonindicted 7 at the time of the autopsy

According to the victim non-indicted 7's legal statement (the fourth trial record of the case No. 2010-Ma9222 of the Suwon District Court prior to transfer), it is difficult to conclude that Non-indicted 7 made a statement that Non-indicted 3 did not have a satisfies at the time of committing the crime, on the ground that it was hard to conclude that Non-indicted 7 had a satisfies at the time of committing the crime, and that Non-indicted 3 had a satfsatfs at the time of the crime, and Non-indicted 24 made a statement that Non-indicted 3 had a reasonable satfsatfs at the scene of the crime of this case, and that Non-indicted 24 made a statement that Non-indicted 3 had a satfs at the time of the crime of this case with the victim's satfs at the time of the crime of this case, and that Non-indicted 3's satisfs at the time of the crime of this case.

B. Whether Defendant 1 conspireds to commit the crime

이 부분 공소사실에 부합하는 공소외 4의 법정진술(이송 전 수원지방법원 평택지원 2010고단922호 사건의 제9, 10회 공판조서, 이하 같다)에 의하면, 공소외 4는 2006. 6.경 공소외 92를 도와주라는 피고인 1의 지시를 받아 공소외 92를 찾아가서 공소외 92로부터 피해자 공소외 7 때문에 자신의 사업에 애로점이 많다는 말을 듣고는 이를 피고인 1에게 보고하였고, 공소외 92를 돕기 위하여 ○○○파 간부회의를 열어서 자신과 그 하위조직원들이 판시 범행을 하기로 하고, 피고인 4와 그 하위조직원들이 ▲▲수리조합을 찾아가 현아무개를 협박하기로 모의한 다음, 피고인 3으로 하여금 판시 공소외 93 주식회사 사무실에 조직원들을 동원하여 폭행하도록 하였고, 그 후 피고인 1로부터 500만 원을 받아 피고인 3에게 수고비로 지급하였으며, 피고인 1의 지시를 받아 공소외 92에게 대가를 지급하여 줄 것을 요구하여 2006. 7. 초·중순경 공소외 92로부터 현금 1,500만 원을 교부받아 공소외 3이 운영하던 오락실에 갖다 준 다음, 그 다음날 위 오락실에 근무하던 정관수를 통하여 피고인 1이 관리하는 계좌로 위 돈을 입금하여 주었다고 하여, 범행 경위 및 범행 전후의 사정에 관하여 매우 구체적이고 합리적으로 설명하고 있는바, 이에 아래와 같은 진술 및 당시의 정황을 더하여 보면 위 진술의 신빙성을 인정할 수 있으므로, 피고인 1이 판시와 같은 폭행범행을 공모하였다는 점에 관하여 합리적인 의심의 여지가 없을 정도로 증명되었다고 할 것이다.

① At the time of the commission of the crime as indicated in the facts constituting the crime No. 201-Ma4, Nonindicted 4, around the time of the crime, was working as the ○○○○ Head of the wharf, and had Defendant 3, Nonindicted 15, 24, and 33 as its subordinate members. As such, the crime that he mobilized was committed by Defendant 1 can be deemed as a crime at the organizational level of ○○○○ Head of that ○○○ Branch.

② 공소외 4의 진술에 반하는 공소외 92의 법정진술(이송 전 수원지방법원 평택지원 2010고단922호 사건의 제15회 공판조서, 이하 같다)에 의하면, 공소외 92는 2006. 4.경 및 2006. 5. 1.경 공소외 163, 159와 함께 피고인 1을 면회하였고, 피고인 1의 면회를 가기 전 이미 공소외 4를 알고 지냈다는 것인바, 피고인 1은 이 법정에서 공소외 92의 면회 이후 자신을 면회 온 공소외 4에게 공소외 92를 찾아가 인사하고 궂은 일을 도와주라고 지시하였다는 취지로 진술하였으며, 공소외 4 또한 법정진술 및 검찰에서의 진술(특히 2011고합13호 수사기록 제1권 제4739, 4740면)을 통하여 일관되게 피고인 1의 소개로 공소외 92를 처음 만났다고 진술하고 있어, 피고인 1과 상관 없이 공소외 4와 먼저 알고 지냈기 때문에 공소외 4에게 토지매입에 관한 일을 주었고 공소외 4에 의하여 판시 범행이 발생하였다는 취지의 공소외 92의 진술은 믿기 어렵다.

③ According to Non-Indicted 3’s legal statement (former Suwon District Court Decision 201Hun-Ga922, Jun. 13, 201), Non-Indicted 3 stated that the funds in the amusement room were KRW 5 million from Defendant 1 to Non-Indicted 4 under the direction of Non-Indicted 4. Defendant 3, who received KRW 2.5 million from Non-Indicted 4 around that time, and stated that he was delivered KRW 1 million separately (No. 478, Jun. 13, 201; No. 1978, Jun. 13, 2011; No. 1927, Nov. 13, 201; No. 527, Jun. 22, 2011; No. 527, Nov. 13, 201; No. 5014, Apr. 4, 201).

④ Even according to Nonindicted 92’s legal statement, Nonindicted 92 recognized that Nonindicted 4 gave KRW 15 million to Nonindicted 4 around July 2006 even though Nonindicted 4 did not have engaged in the land purchase service. Nonindicted 92 knew that Nonindicted 4 was paid KRW 15 million to Nonindicted 4 in compensation for the crime of this judgment, on the ground that there was no particular reason for Nonindicted 92 to pay KRW 15 million to Nonindicted 4, and that it was paid in compensation for the crime of this judgment. According to Defendant 1’s main sentence (Article 4094 of Investigation Record No. 1, No. 2011Gohap13, No. 4094 of Investigation Record No. 1, Dec. 13, 201), Defendant 1 stated “7/11, + 1500”, and Defendant 1 knew that Nonindicted 4 received in compensation for the crime of this case as indicated in the judgment by Nonindicted 92.

⑤ Nonindicted 92 was indicted on September 8, 2010 and was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence on September 16, 2010, and was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence on September 16, 2010, on the charge that Defendant 1, upon receipt of such request, instigated Nonindicted 7 to force the Defendant 3 not to engage in the urban development of the new entertainment district by having the Defendant 3 use violence and intimidation as indicated in its reasoning, which is one of its subordinate organizations, through Nonindicted 4.

2. Crimes against the victim Nonindicted 8

A. Whether the crime in the judgment constitutes a justifiable act

Defendant 3 asserts to the effect that the crime was a justifiable act that does not go against the social rules, since the crime was committed as part of the normal business activity as the business director of Nonindicted 147 corporation.

However, in full view of each evidence in the judgment, Defendant 3 and the conciliation staff between the places in the crime as indicated in the judgment were deemed to have been a member of organized violence as shown in the judgment, and Defendant 3 took a bath as indicated in the judgment. Defendant 3 had the victim Nonindicted 24, among ○○○ lower-ranking staff, stayed in the victim Nonindicted 8’s house for three days, and had the victim Nonindicted 8 and their family members were frighted. Nonindicted 4 said that the victim Nonindicted 8’s daughters were sold to amusement establishments, and the victim Nonindicted 8’s children were delivered two automobiles owned by the victim Nonindicted 8. In addition, it can be acknowledged that the victim Nonindicted 35 was delivered two cars owned by the victim Nonindicted 8, and in addition, it cannot be viewed that the Defendant’s act of registering the Defendant 3 and Nonindicted 24 as a member of the corporation temporarily or temporarily for the purpose of collecting credit payment claims, and it does not violate the social rules of the political party.

B. Whether Defendant 1 conspireds to commit the crime

공소외 4의 법정진술(이송 전 수원지방법원 평택지원 2010고단922호 사건의 제10회 공판조서)에 의하면, 자신은 피고인 1로부터 ‘큰누님( 공소외 35를 지칭)이 사업을 하는데 수금이 안 되니까 만나보라’는 지시를 받아 공소외 35를 만났고, 그 후 피고인 3에게 ‘ ◁◁섬유에 가서 수금을 하라’고 지시하였는데 피고인 3이 제대로 일을 처리하지 못하고 있던 중, 피고인 1로부터 “애들이 일을 제대로 못하고 있는데 어떻게 된 것이냐, 네가 가 보아라”라는 지시를 받고 자신이 ◁◁섬유로 직접 가서 판시 차량 2대를 가져왔다는 것인바, 이러한 진술에 판시 각 증거를 통하여 알 수 있는 범행 전후의 아래와 같은 사정을 더하여 보면, 피고인 1이 공소외 4, 피고인 3과 공모하여 판시 범행을 공모하였다는 점에 관하여 합리적인 의심의 여지가 없을 정도로 증명되었다고 할 것이다.

① According to Nonindicted 35’s legal statement (former Suwon District Court Decision 2010Kadan922 delivered on September 15, 201) Nonindicted 35, Nonindicted 35 was solicited from Defendant 1 to employ Defendant 3 as a cash-raising employee. At that time, Defendant 3 joined ○○○○○m as stated in the facts constituting the crime No. 201Gahap 4 and was actively engaged in the active organizational activities as subordinate officers of Nonindicted 4, and thus, Defendant 1 seems to have been sufficiently anticipated that Defendant 3 would be in charge of intimidation in debt collection as stated in its reasoning.

② At the time of the commission of the crime as indicated in the facts constituting the crime No. 201-Ma4, Nonindicted 4, around the time of the crime, was working as the ○○○○ Head of the wharf, and had Defendant 3, Nonindicted 15, 24, and 33 as its subordinate members. As such, the crime that he mobilized was committed by Defendant 1 can be deemed as a crime at the organizational level of ○○○○ Head of that ○○○ Branch.

③ Defendant 1 stated, in this court, that Nonindicted 35 did not want to visit persons related to the crime, and thus, Nonindicted 4 could not be said to have aided Nonindicted 35’s business. In light of these statements, Nonindicted 4 appears to have no particular reason to take part in the crime as indicated in the judgment without receiving the order of Defendant 1, who was the leader of ○○○m wave, and without receiving the order of Defendant 1, who was the leader of ○○m wave.

3. Crimes against the victim non-indicted 6

A. Whether Defendant 3 conspireds to commit a crime

According to Non-Indicted 9's legal statement (former Suwon District Court Decision 2010Kadan992 delivered on July 14, 201) the appraisal of Non-Indicted 6 was not good. Defendant 3 committed a crime under Defendant 3's order to assault Non-Indicted 6. Defendant 3 was notified of the place where Non-Indicted 6 was located at the time of the crime, and reported to Defendant 3 after committing the crime. In light of the following circumstances, the credibility of the statement can be recognized in light of the following circumstances before and after the crime, and thus, Defendant 3's conspiracy to commit the crime in the judgment is proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

① Nonindicted 9 asked Defendant 3 to work on the ship through the court statement, and Defendant 3 stated Defendant 3’s instructions in detail on the part of Defendant 3, i.e., “S., on the ship which is not left.” However, it should not be viewed as a horse, and even if you see, it should be called as a “Satch”.

② According to the records of Nonindicted 9’s call (No. 3531 of the investigation records No. 2015-13, No. 3531 of the investigation records No. 2011-13), Nonindicted 9 called the phone number on two occasions on December 8, 2009, at the time of the crime, at the time of the crime. Of the results of the analysis of digital evidence related to organized violence, the cell phone (portphone omitted) seized by Defendant 4 was stored as a “type” (Article 3721 of the investigation records No. 2011-4, No. 3721 of the investigation records), Defendant 3, and 4 are deemed to be a “type” (port phone omitted). Thus, the part on which Nonindicted 9 reported the result of the crime to Defendant 3 at the time of the crime is reliable at the time of the crime.

③ Defendant 3 also made a statement that Nonindicted 6 met at Nonindicted 72 wife’s 49 places prior to the date and time of the commission of the crime in this court, and that Nonindicted 6 did not have any scambling and scambly to Nonindicted 9, who had no scambly been scambling. Defendant 3 also made a statement corresponding to the motive of the commission of the crime in the holding that he had no scambly scam

④ In light of the fact that Nonindicted 30 stated, around September 2009, at the time of the crime indicated in the judgment with Nonindicted 56, 58, and 57, Nonindicted 9 and Nonindicted 30 stated, around September 2009, that Nonindicted 3 was the subordinate staff of Defendant 3, Nonindicted 9 could receive instructions as the subordinate staff of Defendant 3 at the time of the crime.

B. Whether Defendant 1 conspireds to commit the crime

According to Non-Indicted 11’s legal statement (the 9th trial record in the case No. 2010Hun-Ga922 of the Suwon District Court prior to transfer; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the statement at the prosecutor’s office (No. 514-5146 of the first right of investigation record No. 2011 and No. 13), it was stated that Non-Indicted 11 instructed Defendant 3 to commit a crime in the court, and it was flick about whether Defendant 1 instructed Defendant 3 to commit an oral crime, and that it was not directly seen at the prosecutor’s office, but the court made a statement to the effect that it was not clear whether it was “non-Indicted 6 work” or “non-Indicted 6 work,” but it was reversed the Non-Indicted 11’s statement that Non-Indicted 3 and Non-Indicted 6 was “after Non-Indicted 1’s phone call at the time of Defendant 1’s visit with Defendant 3, and it was impossible for Defendant 1 to report his criminal facts to Defendant 4.”

Although the statements made by Nonindicted 11 at the prosecutor's office and court are somewhat inconsistent, it is difficult to easily believe such statements. However, the statements made by Nonindicted 11 are generally consistent, very concrete, and it is difficult to make statements without direct experience. In light of the following circumstances that can support the credibility of the statements, in the case of organized crimes and circumstances before and after the criminal act, the instruction of the criminal act is secret, and it is difficult for the subordinate staff, such as Nonindicted 9, to accurately understand whether to give instructions among the superior staff under the organizational structure of the criminal organization, the fact that Defendant 1 conspired for the injury to Nonindicted 6 is proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

① 수사보고(상피의자 피고인 4, 공소외 11 등의 판결문 첨부)의 기재에 의하면, 공소외 11은 피고인 1의 지시에 따라 범행 장소인 ‘ ◆◆◆◆ 커피숍’으로 피해자 공소외 6을 불러냈다고 법정 및 검찰에서 일관되게 진술하고 있고, 위와 같이 피고인 1의 지시로 피해자 공소외 6을 유인함으로써 공소외 9와 공모하여 피해자 공소외 6에게 상해를 가하였다는 공소사실로 이 법원 2010고단649호 로 기소된 후 이를 자백함으로써 위 범죄사실에 대한 처벌을 받았는바, 당시 공소외 11의 수사기관 진술로 인해 피고인 3이 구속되어 피고인 1 앞에서 서로 사과하여야 할 정도로 공소외 11과 피고인 3의 사이가 매우 좋지 않았던 점에 비추어 보면 공소외 11이 단지 피고인 3과 공모하여 위와 같이 피해자 공소외 6을 유인하였다고 보기는 어렵고, 피고인 1의 지시가 아니고서야 스스로 판시 범행에 가담할 별다른 이유가 없는 것으로 보인다.

② Even based on Nonindicted 9’s legal statement, Nonindicted 9 told Nonindicted 6 of the victim Nonindicted 6 at the time of assaulting Nonindicted 6, Nonindicted 9 stated that “The victim she was satisfying about (Terrorism) and that the witness was satisfying.” The victim Nonindicted 6 was satisfying, seated and satisfyed. In light of the attitude immediately after the crime committed by Nonindicted 9, Nonindicted 9’s statement that the victim 6 was satisfyed by personal sentiment alone is difficult to believe that the statement by Nonindicted 9 was satisfy.

③ Nonindicted 3 transferred his subordinate staff to Nonindicted 6 on or around June 2009. Nonindicted 6, Nonindicted 3 stated that Nonindicted 6 had a large amount of lusium, including Nonindicted 6’s accompanying Nonindicted 6, and Nonindicted 6 was able to take care of his subordinate staff, and that Defendant 1 instructed Defendant 1 to “Nonindicted 6’s ○○○ ○○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○”. Nonindicted 27 was instructed in this court that Nonindicted 6 met Nonindicted 6 from one to two months prior to the occurrence of the injury incident as indicated in Nonindicted 9, and that Nonindicted 6 did not take care of Nonindicted 4 at least four to five months prior to the occurrence of the said case, and that Defendant 1 and Nonindicted 6 came to know that Nonindicted 6 was not Nonindicted 4.

④ In this court, Nonindicted 27 ordered Defendant 1’s interview with Defendant 1 to work Nonindicted 6, and asked Defendant 3 to have a telephone conversation. Nonindicted 27 again requested Nonindicted 27 to leave Nonindicted 6. Nonindicted 11 to refuse it, and Nonindicted 11 directly induced Nonindicted 6, and made a detailed statement that Nonindicted 9 was waiting for Nonindicted 6’s hand house. If Nonindicted 9 was failed, Nonindicted 27 was instructed to work.

⑤ In addition, Nonindicted 3 also made a statement in the court (before transfer, the Suwon District Court Decision 2010Kadan922 delivered on the 10th trial report) and stated that Defendant 1 was unable to have Nonindicted 3’s subordinate staff members attend Nonindicted 3’s interview on the ground that Defendant 1 attempted to attack himself in alliance with Nonindicted 4, and that Nonindicted 3’s subordinate staff members could not attend Nonindicted 3’s interview, and that Nonindicted 3 would be able to read Nonindicted 3 when Nonindicted 6 work on the part of the victim and Nonindicted 3, and that there was an injury case in the judgment one to two weeks thereafter.

④ According to the recording on the recording of the In-dong prison on December 4, 2009 (No. 400 through 413 of the investigation records of No. 17586, which were sentenced by the Military Prosecutors’ Office of would be the case of injury in the judgment, at the time when Nonindicted 11 and Defendant 3 interviewed Defendant 1, Defendant 1 appears to have shown to Defendant 3 by writing on the paper, and thus, it is difficult to avoid the possibility that Defendant 1 instructed Defendant 1 to assault by writing on the side of Defendant 1, such as Nonindicted 11’s statement.

4. Crimes against the victim non-indicted 10

피고인 1이 이 부분 범행을 공모하였는지 여부에 관하여 보건대, 공소외 4, 3은 이 법정과 이송 전 수원지방법원 평택지원 2011고단922호 사건의 법정진술 및 검찰에서의 진술( 2011고합4호 수사기록 제7167 내지 7178면, 제8021 내지 8028면)을 통하여 일관되게, 피고인 1이 ▽▽ 일대에서 건설사업을 크게 하던 공소외 10을 자신의 사람으로 끌어들여 금전적 지원을 받으려고 하였으나 뜻대로 되지 않자, 공소외 10을 협박하기 위한 구체적인 시나리오를 짜서 공소외 4, 3 등 ○○○파 간부급 조직원들에게 지시함으로써 공소외 4, 3 등으로 하여금 판시와 같이 ▽▽ ◀◀◀ 부동산에서 ○○○파 조직원들을 동원하여 공소외 10에게 위세를 보이고, 공소외 10의 차량을 손도끼로 손괴하도록 지시하였고, 이에 겁을 먹은 공소외 10으로부터 판시 벤츠 S600 승용차를 교부받았을 뿐만 아니라, ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 아파트의 상가분양권, 소방설비감리권 등 사업이권을 취득하였다고 진술하여 이 부분 공소사실에 구체적으로 부합하는 진술을 하였고, 공소외 1, 27, 28, 24, 15의 각 법정진술과 ▽▽ ◀◀◀ 부동산에 공소외 4의 연락을 받고 갔었다는 피고인 4, 6의 일부 진술이 공소외 4, 3의 위 진술에 부합하며, 아래와 같은 진술 및 판시 각 증거를 통하여 알 수 있는 범행 전후의 사정을 더하여 보면, 피고인 1이 판시와 같이 공소외 10에 대한 갈취범행을 공모하였다는 점은 합리적인 의심의 여지가 없을 정도로 증명되었다고 할 것이다.

① 공소외 10은 법정진술(이송 전 수원지방법원 평택지원 2011고단922호 사건의 제4회 공판조서)을 통하여, 자신이 먼저 피고인 1에게 출소 후 타고 다닐 차를 준비하여 주겠다고 하였고, 판시와 같은 협박 및 재물손괴 범행이 피고인 1이 시켜서 이루어진 것이라고 생각해 본 적 없다고 진술하였다가, 다시 ○○○파 조직원들에 의하여 자신의 차량이 손도끼로 손괴된 사건을 겪은 뒤에 공소외 4가 자신에게 찾아와 피고인 1을 위하여 자신의 차보다 더 좋은 차를 준비해 놓으라고 하여 기분이 나빴고, 자신에게 위협을 가할까봐 겁을 먹어서 차를 교부하였으며, 공소외 4를 피고인 1의 심부름을 하는 사람으로 생각하였다고 고쳐 진술한 바 있고, 검찰에서의 진술( 2011고합13호 수사기록 제1권 제5175 내지 5180면)을 통하여, ▽▽ ◀◀◀ 부동산에서 자신은 너무 두려워서 주변을 쳐다보기도 어려운 지경이었고, 차량이 손괴되는 사건을 겪은 후에는 주변을 살피는 버릇이 생기고 사설경호원을 고용하여 대동하고 다녔다는 취지로 진술하고 있는바, 이러한 진술에 비추어 보면, 단지 공소외 10이 운영하는 회사의 고문으로 일하기로 한 대가로 승용차를 교부받았다는 취지의 피고인 1의 진술은 믿기 어렵다.

② 2011고합4호 범죄사실 기재와 같이 2006. 2. 귀휴행사 이후 ○○○파는 부두목급 조직원들을 중심으로 라인별로 각자 활동하고 있었는데, 피고인 6, 공소외 4, 피고인 4 등 부두목급 조직원들과 그들의 하위조직원들 및 공소외 3이 ▽▽ ◀◀◀ 부동산에서의 피해자 공소외 10에 대한 협박을 위하여 모두 동원되었고, 공소외 3의 하위조직원들은 공소외 10의 차량에 대한 손괴범행을 모의하였는바, 수괴인 피고인 1의 지시가 아니고서야 각자 자신의 하위조직원들을 통솔하면서 개별적으로 활동하고 있던 부두목급 간부조직원들과 그 하위조직원들 모두가 동원되어 역할을 분담함으로써 판시 갈취범행을 할 만한 별다른 이유가 없다.

③ Nonindicted 1 stated in this court that Nonindicted 3’s instructions from Nonindicted 3 to Daejeon were given to Nonindicted 10, and Nonindicted 28 and Defendant 5, who was selected through Nonindicted 27, committed the crime. Nonindicted 1, who received KRW 5 million from Nonindicted 3 to Nonindicted 5 and Nonindicted 28, committed the crime. Nonindicted 1 instructed Nonindicted 3 to give KRW 5 million to the subordinate staff who destroyed Nonindicted 10’s vehicle, and that the statement of Nonindicted 1’s official book (No. 500, KRW 500, KRW 500, KRW 500, KRW 500) stated, “A copy of the investigation record No. 2011 and KRW 13,No. 1271) of Defendant 1’s official book (a copy of the investigation record No. 2011 and KRW 5271 of the investigation record) is consistent with the above statement.

④ From among the search and seizure data of the Suwon Site in 2010, Defendant 1 prepared on August 14, 2006 (section 9392 of the investigation records No. 2015-4), Defendant 1 stated that “it was released from the vehicle” to Nonindicted 4 on the same day. The vehicle is identical to that of Nonindicted 10, and there was cancellation of the contract, which was changed to Nonindicted 10, which was changed to that of Nonindicted 10, and Defendant 1’s meeting with the president (section 1975-4 of the investigation records No. 1987, Oct. 2, 2006) was recorded on Nonindicted 10, Defendant 4 appears to have been distributed from Defendant 10 to Defendant 2, which was recorded on Nonindicted 3’s meeting with Nonindicted 4, which was recorded on Nonindicted 10, Defendant 2, which was recorded on Nonindicted 10, Defendant 2, who was in force by Nonindicted 10, and Defendant 10, which appears to have been distributed to Defendant 10 or supervision on the apartment facility.

5. Bribery;

According to Non-Indicted 11's legal statement (the 9th trial record of the case No. 2010Hun-Ba922 of the previous Suwon District Court on Transfer), and the statement at the prosecutor's office (the 2011 High-Mahap13, No. 2013, No. 21 of the investigation records), Non-Indicted 11 offered entertainment to Non-Indicted 12 in entertainment tavern, and Non-Indicted 13's order that "Non-Indicted 12 will come to come to contact with the Non-Indicted 12," and he heard that Non-Indicted 12's order from Non-Indicted 13 to offer entertainment in return for the crime of this case, Non-Indicted 13's "non-Indicted 12 clothes," which was sentenced from Non-Indicted 13 to Non-Indicted 12 in consideration of the following evidence and evidence, and it is reasonable to view that Non-Indicted 2's order to offer the above correction goods to Non-Indicted 15's public official, which appears to be justifiable.

1. As to Defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4

Defendant 1 as a leader, Defendant 4 was a member of the board of directors, and Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 joined the ○○○○m, which is a criminal organization, as indicated in its reasoning. A criminal organization, due to its violent nature or collective nature, has a strong need to punish more than other crimes in that it causes, directly or indirectly, serious harm to a good number of citizens in the event of committing violent crimes, which would result in a high risk of being committed based on the organization’s status. The ○○m, which is a criminal organization of this case, exercised an influorous violence against a good general citizen who is difficult on the basis of the organization’s power as above, and committed a crime such as frequent violence, etc. while punishing competition to take the lead of other organizations and the world in the region, and committed a crime under the intent to intervene in various interests of the community. In 206, each of the above crimes needs to be actively involved in the election in order to prevent the election of ○○ local election.

In particular, each of the crimes committed by Defendant 1 with respect to Defendant 1 was committed with force on the leader of the criminal organization called ○○○○ Branch and for the maintenance and existence of the crime. Defendant 1 was sentenced to imprisonment for 20 years with prison labor for murder and was additionally sentenced to imprisonment for the offering of bribe and the violation of the Public Official Election Act. Defendant 1 had committed each of the crimes of this case for a long time during the prison term. It can be said that there is a significant possibility of social criticism. Defendant 1, on the other hand, instructed ○○○○○○○○○ Branch to have a consistent criminal act, which is hard to see that it was extremely dissatisfy and dissatisfyed with the system of criminal investigative agencies to dissatisfy and dissatize the system of criminal investigative agencies to make it considerably difficult for ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ Group to provide a bribe for various convenience. Defendant 1, as well as to dissatisfy the system of its organization and behavior.

In light of the fact that the crime committed by Defendant 2, 3, and 4 and the crime of injury against Defendant 3’s victim Nonindicted 6 was committed during the repeated crime period, and Defendant 4 appears to have been involved in the crime closely committed for the maintenance and continuation of organization after becoming an executive member of ○○○○m, a criminal organization, despite having been sentenced to imprisonment for the reason that he joined the △△△△△△△△△△△△△△, even though there was a history of being sentenced to imprisonment for the reason that he joined the △△△△△△△△△△△△, the above defendants joined the crime, which was committed by the above defendants, in view of the fact that each crime committed by the above defendants is very poor, and that the above defendants are not entirely against the above defendants, it is inevitable to punish

However, since some of the crimes of this case committed by the Defendants are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive, considering all the circumstances, such as the fact that punishment should be determined in consideration of equity in the case where judgment has been received at the same time as the crime for which judgment has become final and conclusive pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the punishment against the Defendants shall be

2. As to Defendant 5

The crime of this case committed by Defendant 5 was committed as an early employee of ○○○mion with the power of its organization and with the intent to continue to exist and maintain the organization, as well as the crime of this case committed by Defendant 5. In light of the motive and result of the crime, the nature of the crime is not good.

However, considering all the circumstances, such as the fact that Defendant 5 led to the confession of the crime as indicated in the judgment, and the crime is in a concurrent relationship between the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) and the crime of violation of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment against Defendant 5 should be determined in consideration of the fact that the punishment should be determined.

1. The facts charged against Defendant 6 and the primary facts charged against Defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4

A. Summary of the facts charged

Defendant 6: (a) recruited Nonindicted 1, 51, 52, 53, 30, 54, 81, 37, 56, 56, 9, 57, 58, and 27 to ○○○○○m, which had been subject to the end of 1994 between November 1, 1999 and the end of 200; and (b) constituted an organization of double class 1, 2, 3, and 4 under the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, which had been completely different from that of ○○○m, which had been composed of around April 1994; and (c) joined an organization of double class 1, 2, 3, and 4 that had been newly re-established by Defendant 6.

B. Determination

The term "organization of violent crime group" refers to the formation and establishment of a new organization. As such, when an existing organization of violent crime constitutes a new organization of violent crime crime by using an existing organization of violent crime crime, it refers to a case where an existing organization of violent crime crime crime is separated from an existing organization and constitutes a separate organization of violent crime crime, and where an organization of violent crime crime which is currently in operation is in operation absorbs or combines another organization of violent crime, etc., the organization can be recognized as a separate organization that is not identical with the existing organization of violent crime crime (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do959, May 13, 2005, etc.).

이 사건에 관하여 보건대, 서울고등법원 판결문 사본( 95노1535호 ) 및 수원지방법원 판결문 사본( 94고합1797호 등)의 각 기재에 의하면, 피고인 6은 공소외 3, 6, 44, 73, 74, 50와 공동하여 1993. 12.경 △△△△파를 제거하고 나아가 ◐◐지역 폭력조직의 통합을 목적으로 하는 폭력단체인 ‘ ◑◑◑◑’이라는 폭력단체를 조직한 다음 그 시경부터 1994. 2.경까지 사이에 공소외 47이 이끄는 ‘ ◈◈◈◈파’, 공소외 54가 이끄는 ‘ ●●파’와 공소외 44가 이끄는 ∇∇∇파 등을 규합하여 피고인 6은 두목급 수괴로, 공소외 3은 부두목급 간부로, 공소외 6, 44는 행동대장급 간부로 하는 ○○○파라는 범죄단체를 조직하였다는 공소사실로 기소되어 서울고등법원에서 1995. 8. 30. 징역 5년의 유죄판결을 선고받았고, 같은 날 피고인 6에 대한 위 판결은 상고권 포기로 확정된 사실을 인정할 수 있는바, 그렇다면 피고인 6이 유죄판결을 받아 처벌받은 후 와해되었던 ○○○파를 1999. 11.경부터 2000년 말경까지 사이에 재건한 것인지 여부에 관하여 살펴보기로 한다.

In full view of the following statements and the organization structure of ○○mp in the facts charged as stated below, it can be seen that Defendant 6 restructuring the organization by expanding the existing ○○mp, which had been temporarily imposed at the time, as a leader from November 1, 199 to the end of 2000. However, it is difficult to view that the organization of ○○mp, which is a separate criminal organization having no identity with the existing ○○mp, was completely changed, by completely changing the organization.

① At the time of joining this court, Nonindicted Party 1 stated that the existing ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ was Nonindicted 3, 6, and 37 other than Defendant 6 at the time of joining this court. Nonindicted Party 1 stated in this court that Nonindicted Party 3, a wharf of the former ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ was aware of Nonindicted 6’s organization’s terminal title, and stated in that Nonindicted Party 1, 203 at the time of Nonindicted Party 3’s request for renewal of the status of the existing ○○○○○○○○○○.

② At the time of joining this Court, Nonindicted Party 1 stated that there was no separate procedure for Defendant 6, including Non-Indicted 53, 52, and 51, to find Defendant 6’s organizational life at the time of joining this Court.

③ Even based on the facts constituting the crime in the judgment, the purpose of ○○○○○○m, which was revised, is to secure economic benefits by participating in various interests, such as the sexual traffic business establishments in △△○○○○○○○○○m, which are the △△△△△△△△△’s competitive organization, and the leading authority over the violent world, based on which such organization is held, such as the sexual traffic business establishments, illegal amusement rooms, entertainment bars, entertainment bars, and construction business, etc. of a member of the △△△△△○○ City, and such organization purpose appears to be the same

④ According to the statements made by Nonindicted 165 and 30 in this Court, Nonindicted 6-C of the facts constituting the crime at the end of 1999, Nonindicted 1, 53, 52, and 51, etc., in addition to Nonindicted 6, 50, 74, and 37, Nonindicted 6, 50, in addition to the powers newly admitted to the ○○○○○○○○ Group, Nonindicted 6, 50, 74, and 37.

⑤ 기존 ○○○파는 피고인 6이 이끌던 ◑◑◑◑이라는 폭력단체가 공소외 54가 이끄는 ‘ ●●파’를 규합하였다는 것인데, 공소외 27, 3의 이 법정에서의 진술 및 공소외 1, 3의 검찰에서의 진술( 2011고합4호 수사기록 중 제6715면, 제7965면)에 의하면, 공소외 1은 ‘ ∇∇패’라는 불량써클 생활을 하다가 ‘ ●●파’와 더불어 □□로 들어가 ‘ □□패’의 리더로 활동하던 중 ○○○파에 가입하였다는 것이고, 공소외 27, 58, 57, 85 등은 고등학교 시절부터 ‘ ●●파’ 패거리로 활동을 하다가 ○○○파에 가입하였다는 것이므로, 기존 ○○○파와 재정비된 ○○○파는 인적 구성에 있어서 이질적이라고 할 수는 없다.

④ At the time of joining this court, Nonindicted Party 1 stated that he was punished by Defendant 6 at the time of entering this court, and Nonindicted Party 30 also stated that Nonindicted Party 1 entered ○○○○m in this court because he was aware that Nonindicted Party 1 was aware of entering this court, and Nonindicted Party 57 also stated that Nonindicted Party 1 was a force of ○○○mion pursuant to Nonindicted Party 1, as he became a natural scam, (Article 4902 out of the investigation records No. 201, No. 2011, No. 4). Thus, Nonindicted Party 1, etc., who was the major axis of ○○○mion, was aware that he was joining the existing ○○○mion at the time of joining the court.

Ultimately, this part of the facts charged that Defendant 6 had re-dried the ○○○ wave which had been affected by Defendant 6 from November 1, 1999 to the end of 2000 cannot be deemed as having been proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and thus, Defendant 6 is acquitted.

In addition, the facts charged against the defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4 should be pronounced not guilty on the same grounds. However, as long as the facts charged in the preliminary charges are found guilty, the judgment of innocence shall not be rendered separately.

2. Determination as to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Organization and Activity of Organizations, etc.) among the facts charged against Defendant 5

A. Summary of the facts charged

Defendant 5, around March 2006, around 2006, was to live with Nonindicted Party 27, 28, 40, etc., who is a member of the ○○○ branch, who is a member of the organization of ○○○○ branch, as an organization of ○○ branch, and was aware that the ○○ branch was a criminal organization, thereby joining the said organization.

B. Determination

위와 같은 공소사실에 부합하는 듯한 증거로는 공소외 28의 진술이 있으나, 공소외 28은 이 법정에서 피고인 5가 2006년 초봄경 ○○○파에 가입하여 활동하게 된 것으로 기억한다고 진술하면서도, 한편으로는, 자신은 그보다 5년 전인 2001. 5.경 ○○○파에 가입하였는데 당시 서울 ▣▣에 같이 있던 피고인 5와 마음이 맞아 같이 공소외 166의 소개를 받아 ▽▽에 내려오게 되었으며, 피고인 5는 조직원들을 만나 인사하는 방법으로 조직원 생활을 하게 되었다고 진술하고 있으므로, 피고인 5가 2006년 초봄경 ○○○파에 가입하였다는 위 진술을 그대로 믿기 어려운 반면, 피고인 5로부터 ○○○파에 가입한다는 의사를 들었다고 공소사실에 적시된 공소외 27은 이 법정 및 검찰에서 피고인 5가 2005. 4. 이후 공소외 40과 함께 ▽▽으로 내려와서 조직생활을 하였다고 진술하고 있는바, 위 진술에 의하더라도 공소사실에 피고인 5의 가입일로 기재된 2006. 3.경과는 약 1년 정도 차이가 날 뿐만 아니라, 공소외 27은 또 검찰에서 피고인 5가 2006. 5.경부터 활발하게 활동하였고, 2006년 중반경에는 공소외 10의 차량을 도끼로 손괴하는 사건도 맡아서 하였는바, 조직에 들어온지 몇 달 안되는 조직원에게는 그런 일을 맡기거나 하지 않으므로 당시에 피고인 5는 적어도 1년 이상 조직원으로 생활하고 있던 것이 맞다고 진술( 2011고합4호 수사기록 중 제8650면)하여, 피고인 5가 ○○○파 가입일시로 공소사실에 적시된 2006. 3.보다 훨씬 전에 ○○○파에 가입하였다는 취지로 진술하고 있고, ○○○파 조직원이었던 공소외 22 또한 검찰에서 2002. 7.경 인천 지역에서 ▣▣파 식구로 생활하던 공소외 28, 피고인 5와 함께 ▽▽에 내려와 생활을 하였고, 공소외 166의 권유로 조직원으로 가입하였다고 진술( 2011고합4호 수사기록 중 제5318면)하고 있는바, 위와 같은 진술을 종합하여 볼 때 피고인 5가 공소사실 기재와 같이 2006. 3.경 ○○○파에 가입하였다는 점에 관하여 합리적인 의심의 여지가 없을 정도로 증명되었다고 보기는 어려우므로, 이 부분 공소사실은 범죄사실의 증명이 없는 경우에 해당하여 형사소송법 제325조 후단에 따라 무죄를 선고한다[ 피고인 5가 2001년 내지 2002년에 ○○○파에 가입하였다고 보더라도, 피고인 5의 이 부분 공소사실은 구 형사소송법(2007. 12. 21. 법률 제8730호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제249조 제1항 제3호 에 따라 7년의 공소시효가 적용되므로, 이 사건 공소제기일인 2011. 1. 25. 이전에 이 부분 공소사실은 이미 공소시효가 완성되었다고 할 것이다)].

3. Of the facts charged against Defendant 1, the charge of aiding and abetting the victim Nonindicted 11

A. Summary of the facts charged

Defendant 1, through Nonindicted 3, at a place where it is difficult to know the location of the Nacheon-si located in the middle of August 2009, Defendant 1 put the victim Nonindicted 11 to the victim Nonindicted 11, through Nonindicted 3, in a place where it is difficult to identify the location of the Nacheon-si located in the police officer. In the event of the failure to pay the said money, Defendant 1 put the victim Nonindicted 11, who would incur any harm to the body, etc. of the victim Nonindicted 11.

After that, around November 19, 2009, Defendant 1 told the victim non-indicted 11 by telephone, that "at first, he did not know about his her son, he did so, and she did not want to do so, and he was aware of her her her fry, and even her her fling with his her fry, and even her fling with her fling with his her fling, so her 100 million won will be her fry." In the event he did not follow the Defendant's instructions, Defendant 1 committed any harm to the victim non-indicted 11.

피고인 1은 2010. 3. 초순 15:00경 ▽▽시 (이하 생략) 소재 위 피해자 공소외 11 운영의 “ ◈◈◈◈◈” 사무실에서, 공소외 13을 통하여 위와 같은 피고인의 행동에 겁을 먹고 있는 피해자 공소외 11로부터 현금 5천만 원을 교부받아 갈취하였다.

B. Determination

According to the court and the statement at the prosecutor's office as shown in this part of the facts charged, around August 2009, Nonindicted 11 transferred the same remarks as indicated in the facts charged from Nonindicted 3, and around November 19, 2009, Defendant 1 demanded KRW 100 million for the receipt of the cash directly as indicated in the facts charged. Accordingly, on March 2010, Nonindicted 11 delivered KRW 50 million to Defendant 1 through Nonindicted 13 out of the cash cash kept in the house of Nonindicted 167, which was kept in the house of Nonindicted 167, which was delivered to Defendant 1. In light of the following statements and the circumstances at the time, it is difficult to believe that the above statement of Nonindicted 11 was made, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that Nonindicted 11 delivered KRW 57,39,168,169 due to Defendant 1's intimidation.

① Nonindicted 3 stated in this court that Nonindicted 1 did not call Nonindicted 11 to the effect that he would die of Nonindicted 11’s family, and that Nonindicted 3 only her fly fly fly fested at the same atmosphere of the atmosphere that she would not be subject to the calculation of tax base of taxable income on his match.

② Examining the record on the recording of the In-dong prison (No. 381-399 pages of the investigation records of No. 17586 of the office of Pyeongtaek District Public Prosecutor’s Office in 2010) on November 19, 209, Defendant 1 appears to have searched Nonindicted 11 as Defendant 3 at the time of the interview on the above date and solicited Nonindicted 11 to make a mutual compromise with each other, and had only talked with Nonindicted 11 and game businesses, etc., and it is difficult to find out the circumstances that it seems that Defendant 1 would suggest intimidation with Nonindicted 11. It is difficult to easily understand that Defendant 1, like Nonindicted 11’s statement, demanded KRW 100 million on the day of the interview.

③ Nonindicted 11 made a statement that he borrowed KRW 100 million from Defendant 1 for the bond business on or around December 2009 through the court statement. It is difficult to understand that Defendant 1 demanded KRW 100 million in return for correspondence, such as Nonindicted 11’s statement, in the situation where Defendant 1 loaned KRW 100 million to Nonindicted 11 at the time.

④ Nonindicted 168 stated that Nonindicted 11 was an employee of the credit service office operated by Nonindicted 11, and that Nonindicted 11 gave money to Nonindicted 13 as above, Nonindicted 168 stated that Nonindicted 11 did not feel any fear of intimidation at the time of delivering money to Nonindicted 13, via a legal statement (the eight-time protocol of the Suwon District Court case No. 2010Kadan922, Suwon District Court Decision No. 2010, Nov. 922).

Therefore, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure

Judges Kim Jin-jin (Presiding Judge)