(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.7.선고 2015고단2827 판결

A person shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two months for a crime listed in the annexed Table 1 or 19, among crimes listed in the judgment of the defendant, and by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than ten months for a crime listed in the annexed Table 2, No. 20 through No. 178.

Reasons

Criminal History Office

On June 19, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act at the Seoul Western District Court on September 18, 2012, and the execution of the sentence was terminated. On August 8, 2013, the Seoul Western District Court was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc., and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 11, 2013.

1. Fraud against the victim B;

On April 17, 2013, at ○○ Detention Center located in ○○○○, Seoul, ○○○○○○○, the Defendant was scheduled to seek an attorney-at-law to give KRW 100 million to the victim B about the instant case, and the Defendant would also be able to be released upon a suspended sentence by allowing the victim B to defend the case at the same time. If the Defendant could not release the Defendant, the Defendant said that the Defendant would return KRW 10 million to the victim B.

However, the defendant thought that he received the above money from the victim and sent it to ○○○○. As above, there was no intention to appoint an attorney, and there was no particular property at the time, and there was no ability to appoint an attorney.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received the amount equivalent to KRW 10 million from the victim to the account in the name of the National Bank in the name of Do governor △△△ on the same day.

2. Fraud against the victim C;

On July 31, 2013, the Defendant stated that “In ○○ Detention House located in ○○○○○○, Seoul, ○○○○○○○○○, the Defendant would give 2.5 billion won to the victim C, by purchasing things, etc. necessary for prison life and lending necessary money.”

However, the Defendant did not receive money from ○○○○ Co., Ltd., and even if he received necessary goods from the victim or received money without any specific property at the time, he did not have any intent or ability to pay the money to the victim or to pay the said 2.5 billion won.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, obtained a book equivalent to 46,300 won at the market price on the same day from the victim, and acquired the same amount by fraud by acquiring property or property benefits equivalent to KRW 26,967,07,071 in total from 178 times until January 12, 2015, such as the list of crimes in attached Form 178.

Summary of Evidence

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

1. Statement of each prosecutorial statement concerning C and B;

1. Ledger of money kept in custody, ledger of goods kept in custody, and details of purchase by period of each prisoner;

1. Each investigation report (including attached documents, No. 5, 7, 8, 17, 27, No. 5, 500);

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Statement of inquiry into criminal records, etc., four copies of electronic confinement records, each judgment, and investigation reports (including attached documents No. 15 No. 5 of the evidence list);

Application of Statutes

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

Article 347 (1) of each Criminal Code (each fraud, and Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act is not applicable to cases falling under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act (the crimes of No. 1, the crimes of No. 1 through No. 19, the annexed Table No. 2, the annexed Table No. 2, the crime of fraud, etc. of the first head of the judgment that became final and conclusive on Oct. 11, 2013, and the latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and where the judgment could not be rendered at the same time, and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act is not applicable. Supreme Court Decision 2012Do9295, Sept. 27, 2012 (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Do4

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37(former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50(2) of the Criminal Act (Mutual Crimes No. 1 through 19 of the List of Crimes in Attached Form No. 2 from among the Crimes of Article 1 of the Decision)

The reason for sentencing [the reasons for sentencing] [the crime of No. 1 and the crime of No. 2 of the judgment, the annexed No. 1 through No. 19 of the List of Crimes] / [the type of the judgment] fraud, general fraud, and type No. 1 (less than KRW 100 million

【Special Convicted Persons】

-Aggravated factor: A repeated offense if it has been committed for a considerable period of time;

[Determination on the recommended Area] Special Priority Area: one year to three years;

【Determination of Sentence】

The following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of crime, and circumstances after crime are taken into account, and the punishment shall be determined by leaving the lower limit in the recommended area, as indicated in the instant records.

It is very poor that the defendant committed the above crime because he received a large amount of money from the victim B and C who is the same reduction of capital despite being detained, even though he was under detention. The defendant has the same record as the defendant.

The defendant divided his mistake. The defendant paid 4 million won out of the amount of damage 10 million won to the victim B and agreed with the above victim C. On October 11, 2013, the amount of damage to the victim C until the judgment became final and conclusive, and the defendant paid 10 million won out of the total amount of damage 27 million won to the victim C and agreed with the victim C.

[Attachment 2] Crimes No. 20 to 178 of [Attachment 2]

【Determination of Sentence】

It is very poor that the defendant committed the above crime because he received a large amount of money from the victim C who is the same reduction of capital even though he was under detention and is under detention. The defendant has the same power as the defendant.

The favorable circumstances of ○: The defendant is divided into his mistake, and the defendant's mistake as to the victim C, above 2013.

10. After the judgment became final and conclusive, the amount of damage was approximately KRW 20,300,000,000,000,000 for total amount of damage to the victim C, and the Defendant agreed with the above victim C by paying approximately KRW 27,00,000,000 out of total amount of damage.

Judges

Judges Kim Jong-kon

참조조문

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2015.01.30 2014노1171

-창원지방법원 2015.04.30 2015노88

-울산지방법원 2020.05.14 2020노188

-인천지방법원 2015.12.16 2015노3947

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.07 2015고단2827