2014Gohap314(Separation).Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes

(Fraud)

B. Violation of the Illegal Check Control Act

(c) An exercise of forged securities;

(d) Concealment of an offender;

1.(a)(c) A;

2.B

The former citizens and the latter's office house (public trial)

Attorney C (for the defendant A)

Attorney D (Korean National Assembly for Defendant B)

September 26, 2014

Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six years and fine for 200,000,000 won, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months. If Defendant A fails to pay the above fine, the above Defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for a period calculated by converting KRW 500,000 into one day.

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

Seized Chapter 760 (No. 7) and Chapter 700 (No. 8) of 10,000 won shall be confiscated from the Defendant A.

To order the defendant A to pay an amount equivalent to the above fine.

On March 21, 2014, Defendant B was sentenced to imprisonment for two years and six months at the Busan District Court on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicles) and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 29 of the same year.)

1. Defendant A

(a) Public offering relations in succession;

(1) E included a bank staff and deducted a blank check which can include 100 million won or more, and then paid a fee to the bond company to issue the original cashier’s checks with the check number and copy of the original check, and forged the so-called “dunes round checks” in such a way as to secure the check number and copy of the original check, and planned to commit the crime of defrauding money by presenting it to the bank.

(2) On December 2012, E around the end of December 2012, F, a financial hub, deducted a blank check from a bank’s staff through a bank, 20% of the check amount by forging a pair of balls, and H, a vice head of a national bank G branch office of the National Bank, was introduced from F. H in collusion with E to deduct a blank bank’s blank check paper and also to provide a loan guarantee for the preparation of the cost of the forged check.

(3) On January 2013, E proposed that “I shall deduct blank checks from a national bank, but two balls would be forged,” and I accepted this.

(4) Around February 2013, 2013, J proposed that “B shall forge the two balls with a white index, and shall give 2,300 million won to banking employees who will receive it.” After accepting this, J introduced Ma through K, L, and then introduce Ma to E. In order to give E the bank employees who will receive a pair of balls, and E, in return, divided dividends to J, M, and K.

(5) Meanwhile, E experienced difficulties in finding the original of the cashier’s check necessary for forging two balls, N is required to connect the bond company to be issued with 10 billion won cashier’s checks. From May 2013, 2013, P was issued with a 10 billion won cashier’s checks and was introduced with a bond company to provide for the issuance of a 10 billion won cashier’s checks, and P was to receive 30% of the check amount, including the bond company’s shares, from E. In return, P was to receive 30% of the check amount.

(6) Around February 2013, Q signed a fund agreement with the bond-raising company under the name of Q as a representative, and proposed that Q would issue the original check in the name of the bond-raising company, and that Q would pay a so-called "the so-called "the withdrawal of money by depositing the forged check with the account in the name of the said corporation", and that Q accepted it.

(7) On June 2013, E shows two copies of the check to pro-de Defendant A and S. The phrase “one head is 250 million won fake check, and one head is a blank check, which is 10 billion won. It will create 10 billion won.” Defendant A, despite being aware of the fact that he/she intends to forge the check and acquire funds, accompanied with E, to protect and protect E, which is already designated and multiple times of receipt, in the vicinity of the police’s in order to keep them from being subject to the non-examination of the police, and to communicate with the related accomplices, and to participate in driving and withdrawal of the check. However, the violation of the Illegal Check Control Act secured T& (10 billion won) as the bond company that will have issued the original cashier’s checks, and paid a copy of the check to 10 billion won in return for the issuance of the check in the name of 15:00 on June 11, 2013.

The bond company U issued one cashier's check number at the W point of the National Bank in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, as well as Q, and offered Q with a copy of the check and a copy of the check check check to Q, and Q delivered it to Q.

E, as seen above, upon securing a copy of the cashier’s check and a copy of the passbook, at the above W point, issued S with the copy of the above cashier’s check and a copy of the passbook. At around 18:00 on June 11, 2013, S sent the copy of the check and a copy of the passbook to I by facsimile at the Zyang point located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Y. In addition, Defendant A, along with S, was accompanied by the NA’s No. Y. car operated by A, a transfer to the upper end of the Seoul Western-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 20:00-21:00 on the same day, and E was transferred to the upper end of the 20:0-21:00 on the same day, and at the 'AB coffee shop in the above upper end station’, E requested for the forgery of the check and the charge of forging the instant blank check and the charge of forging work.

At around that time, I stated "AC", "10,00,000,000" in the gold column, "6 June 11, 2013," "W branch AD" in the blank column, "W branch AD" in each name, affixed the official seal of the W branch of the National Bank W of the National Bank in Gangnam-gu Seoul, at around 23:0-24:00 of the same day, and then delivered it to E from the Nice hotel in Gangnam-gu, Seoul. Accordingly, Defendant A et al. in collusions with and in series as above, in collusions with E et al., and in series, conspireds with the above 10,00,000 won.

A cashier's checks in the name of 10 billion won were forged.The violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), Defendant A of the forged securities event presented the above checks to Q in advance, and ordered the head of AG to deposit the checks in five billion won by opening two separate checks in the name of 5 billion won on June 12, 2013 at the Hene Hotel hotel located in Gangnam-gu Seoul on June 12, 2013.

Accordingly, on June 12, 2013, Q opened two accounts in the name of R through the Vice Minister with knowledge of the forgery of the said check at the AF branch of the above national bank, and received deposit of KRW 5 billion from the victim citizen bank for each of the above accounts by depositing the forged check as if it was actually issued. Defendant A, at around 12:30 of the same day and around 14:40 of the same day, moved to a royalty hotel in the name of Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, as well as the E, to a royalty hotel, and waited until the withdrawal of KRW 10 billion deposited into the said account and exchange work is completed.

Accordingly, Defendant A conspireds with E, etc. in order to exercise the cashier’s checks of KRW 10 billion, which are the securities forged as above, and acquired the total of KRW 10 billion from the victim’s national bank.

2. Defendant B

From June 27, 2013 to July 13, 2013, Defendant B concealed Q by being aware that Q from around July 27, 2013, to around July 01:35, 2013, Defendant B, who was introduced through J apartment 209 Dong 1003, Defendant B, was committing a crime corresponding to a fine or heavier punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol of S, AA, and E;

1. Statement of each police officer made to U, K and AL, complaint, and certified copy of the register of a corporation;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal history reports (B) and investigation reports (verification of facts in court B);

Application of Statutes

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

○ Defendant A: Article 5 of the Illegal Check Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 3(1)1 of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (Fraud, Selection of Imprisonment and Selection of Imprisonment) and Articles 217, 214(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (a point of exercising forged securities)

○ Defendant B: Article 151(1) of the Criminal Act (Appointment of Imprisonment)

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

○ Defendant B: the latter part of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act (Mutual between the crime of harboring a criminal and the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

○ Defendant A: the first sentence of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and 3, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [Concurrent punishment prescribed in the Act on the Control of Illegal Check and the Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) with the penalty heavier than the penalty, shall be imposed concurrently]

1. Detention in a workhouse;

○ Defendant A: Articles 70(1) and (2) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

○ Defendant B: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Confiscation;

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

1. Order of provisional payment;

○ Defendant A: Article 6 of the Illegal Check Control Act, Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The scope of punishment;

○ Defendant A: Imprisonment of 5 years to 45 years and fine of 100 billion won or less;

○ Defendant B: Imprisonment for not more than three years;

2. Scope of recommendations (Defendant A);

○ Basic Crime: Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)

【Determination of Punishment】

- Frauds, organized frauds, Type 4 (at least five billion won, at least 30 billion won),

[General Convicts] - Reductions: Serious reflects

[Scope of Recommendation] Six to nine years in the calendar (the basic area, the violation of the Illegal Check Control Act with no sentencing guidelines set, and the crime of uttering of forged securities, considering only the lowest limit of the recommended punishment)

3. Determination of sentence;

The crime of this case by Defendant A is a large financial fraud crime in which many accomplices, including Defendant A, share their respective roles and deducts a large amount of 100 million won or more from the employees of the National Bank of Korea, which can be entered in the face value of 100 million won or more from the employees of the National Bank of Korea, and the bond company obtains a copy of the check after having them issued 10 billion won or more from the employees of the National Bank of Korea, secure the copy of the check, enter the same check number as the original cashier's checks on the above blank check paper, forged the check of 10 billion won or more in the manner of suggesting payment of forged checks to a specific bank source. Considering the fact that Defendant A received 10 billion won or more from the prior bank source and distributed it in the bond market, Defendant A did not actively participate in the process of forging checks or money laundering, but even after being aware of the above crime plan, Defendant A received the aforementioned amount of money to be used in the course of committing the crime of this case and then carried out 20 billion won or more.

However, Defendant A voluntarily submitted to an investigative agency the remaining 45 million won of consumption of 200 million won of his/her own share, without any record of criminal punishment heavier than suspended execution, and the fact that he/she is not in a state of health due to a compromise, shall be considered as favorable to the Defendant, and the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, including Defendant A’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive for committing the crime, and circumstances after committing the crime.

The crime of this case by Defendant B was committed by Defendant B, who was the birth partner of S, was concealed in his house Q, and concealed the criminal. In light of the seriousness of Q’s crime, the liability for the crime is not less severe in light of the gravity of Q.

However, Defendant B’s confession of his crime, concealment of Q Q at the request of S who is a private village and seems to have never obtained any benefit in return for committing the crime. At present, the possibility of improving the education at the young age of 32 is considered as favorable circumstances to Defendant B. When the judgment was rendered simultaneously with the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. (Doing Vehicles) and the consideration should be given to the case of equity, and the punishment shall be determined as ordered in consideration of various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the character and behavior, environment, motive for committing the crime, and circumstances after committing the crime.

Judge of the presiding judge;

Judges Park Jong-chul

Judges Shin Dong-dong