200 Highest 1279 Violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act

1. Maximum mountain, 62 years old, south, and daily labor;

Residential Ulsan

(At present Ullsan detention center in prison)

Reference domicile

2. Kim Ho-dong, 57 years old, female, and non-permanent;

Residential Ulsan

Reference domicile

The entertainment (prosecution) and leapon-line (public trial)

Attorney Kim Kim (Presiding over the defendants)

April 28, 2020

[Defendant Samsan]

Defendant Samsan Central District Court Decision 200,000 won shall be collected as follows: (a) imprisonment with prison labor for a period of ten months; (b) imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of Category 2; and (c) imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two months; (b) imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of Category 2; (c) imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two months.

[Defendant Kim Ho-ho]

Defendant Kim Jong-ho shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

However, with respect to Defendant Kim Ho-dong, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive. Defendant Kim Ho-ho ordered a community service for 80 hours. Defendant Kim Ho-ho collected KRW 2,00,000 from Defendant Kim Ho-ho.

Criminal History; 【Real Crime History】

On December 13, 2018, the judgment of the defendant is final and conclusive on December 21, 2018 after being sentenced to four months of imprisonment for fraud at the Ulsan District Court and one year of probation, and on December 21, 2018.

【Criminal Facts】

1. The defendant Kim Ho-dong shall not receive or promise to receive money, valuables, entertainment or other benefits under the pretext of making a solicitation or arrangement with respect to the cases or affairs that the defendant's joint criminal servants handle. The defendant Kim Ho-dong shall not be allowed to receive or promise to receive money, valuables, entertainment or other benefits. The defendant Kim Jong-dong shall, around November 2018, seek "J Gameland" from the victim Kim Jong-gu, the main owner of the "J Gameland". There may be no well known police officers in the surrounding area; it may be possible to resolve the case; it shall be possible to find that the defendant was the victim of this case's 0 p.m., "I will not be allowed to receive or attempt to receive the victim's maximum amount of money, valuables, entertainment or other benefits" to the defendant's 0 p.m., the defendant's 20 p.m., "I will be allowed to solve the damage to the defendant's 30 p.m., the defendant's 200 p.m.

After all, around December 4, 2018, Defendant Samsan received KRW 20 million from the victim Kim Jong-soo’s damage to the Agricultural Cooperative account in the name of Defendant Choi Jong-san, and around that time, Defendant Kim Jong-ho was able to bring about KRW 2 million in the name of introduction expenses. Accordingly, Defendant received money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation for the cases handled by public officials by public offering.

2. The defendant's best criminal conduct;

A. Defendant 1: (a) Donsan National Police Agency’s Donsan-si Donsan-si, the police officers of the Sinsan-si, on November 2018, 201, suffered from the victim’s leap (one’s name) who is the business owner of the Ulsan National Police Agency “K Adult Game Center 2 million won at the National Police Agency? Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don nn Don nn Don nnn Don nan-dong, and so, Don Don Don Don nn Don Don Don nn nn Don Don nn nnn nn nnn nn nn nnn n n nnnnnnn n n nnnnnnn n n nnnnn nnnn k.

After all, around November 7, 2018, Defendant was transferred KRW 4 million to the Agricultural Cooperative account in the name of his spouse Kim Jong-woo. Accordingly, Defendant was given money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation on the case to be handled by public officials. However, around November 28, 2018, Defendant was given money and valuables to the victim’s tea and staff members engaged in the adult game room rental business in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-gu, and his employees (tentative name). However, Defendant 1 was able to look at the order of the National Police Agency, and Defendant 2 was able to take measures to prevent police officers from entering the game of this case without any investigation.

Ultimately, around November 30, 2018, Defendant received KRW 2,000,00 from the victim’s tea to the agricultural bank account in the name of the Defendant under the said name. Accordingly, Defendant received money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation as to the cases handled by public officials.

C. On February 18, 2019, at the coffee shop near the Hland near Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City, Defendant 1 saw that “I am bb with the police officers of the local government before the bank,” and the executives and employees of the P and Yland called “I am b where I am am bb before the bank,” and “I am am amb where I am am. I am am. I am am., but I am am. I do not am. I am am. I do not am. I am. I am am. I am. I am. I am am. I do not am. I am. I do not am. I do am. I do not am. I do am. I do am. I do not am. I do am. I do am. I do am. I do not do so.”

Ultimately, around February 20, 2019, Defendant was transferred KRW 1 million to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of the Defendant’s spouse, the Defendant’s spouse, from the victim’s lease in which the said talk was transmitted by executives and employees.

As a result, Defendant received money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation on the cases handled by public officials.

The summary of evidence (to be omitted)

Application of Acts and Subordinate Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions and selection of punishment on the facts of crime;

(a) Defendants: Article 111(1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act;

(b) Maximum amount of defendant: Article 111 (1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act;

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

The last sentence of the defendant: the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act (Provided, That because the date and time of the crime is not later than the date and time of the final judgment of the previous crime, the crime of Article 2-3 of the Criminal Act, which was committed after the date and time of the final judgment of the previous crime, may not be the crime of the previous crime and the latter concurrent crime of Article 37 of

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Defendant Samsan: the first sentence of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50(1) of the Criminal Act; delay of enforcement

Defendant Kim Ho-ho: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Social service order;

Defendant Kim Ho-ho: Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. Additional collection:

Defendant: the latter part of Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act

Reasons for sentencing [Defendant 3]

In the instant case, Defendant 1 is led to the confession of the instant crime, and the crime Nos. 1, 2-A, and b of the judgment and the relationship between the crime and the latter concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the principle of equity with the case to be judged at the same time is more favorable. However, Defendant 2’s solicitation to the police officer and solicitation to the police officer would lead to a very poor nature of the crime by receiving money and valuables. The crime No. 2 of the judgment was committed without being aware of the crime during the grace period, and the amount of money and valuables received is not clear and does not recover from damage. It is inevitable to sentence sentence. In addition, considering Defendant’s age, environment and health conditions, the means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence shall be determined as per the order.

[Defendant Kim Ho-ho]

In light of various sentencing factors, such as Defendant’s intent, environment, health status, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the execution of imprisonment is suspended on condition of community service as ordered, taking into account the following factors: (a) the confession of the instant crime; (b) there was no record of being punished in excess of the same kind of crime or fine; (c) the degree of participation is minor compared to the maximum amount of the Defendant’s Marchsan; and (d) the means and consequence of the crime; and

Judges Kim Jong-soo