Defendant

Defendant and one other

Subrogation dilution

Law Firm Dou General Law Office, Attorneys Kim Jong-sung et al.

Mads

1. High Court Decision 2005Ra3 decided May 9, 2005

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The ninety-three days of detention before the judgment of the court below is pronounced shall be included in the above sentence.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

65,000,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel is too unreasonable in light of the defendant's circumstances. The gist of the grounds for appeal by the military prosecutor is as follows: where the defendant deceivings the other party and receives money for the use of money for expenses to public officials as shown in the facts charged 2.0, the defendant constitutes a case where "the defendant knowingly receives money and valuables for the purpose of bribery," and thus, the defendant constitutes not only fraud, but also a crime of acquiring third-party brains at the same time, but also a crime of acquiring third-party brains at the same time constitutes a crime of fraud, and the court below found the defendant not guilty of the acquisition of third-party brains. This is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, the

2. Judgment of the court below

Pursuant to the records, prior to the determination of the grounds for appeal as to each of the above grounds for appeal, the military prosecutor conducted an ex officio in the first instance trial and pursuant to lawful procedures. The name of the crime in the indictment No. 6 of the Ministry of Justice No. 1 military headquarters No. 05 assistant prosecutorial department No. 05 assistant prosecutorial department No. 6 is "violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act, fraud, and acquisition of third-party brains", and the applicable provisions of the Acts are primarily stated as "violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act," Articles 111 and 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act, Articles 347 (1), 37, and 38 of the Criminal Act, and the ancillary owner of the same Act, “Article 111 and Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act,” Articles 347 (1), 133 (2) and (1), 129, 134, 30, 37, and 38 of the Criminal Act.

A. On October 11, 2004, 2004, the Defendant received money and valuables from the Defendant to receive KRW 30,000,000 from the Defendant as the head of a national bank in his/her name and receive money from the public official, and at the same time, receive money and valuables under the pretext that he/she receives money from the Defendant to receive KRW 30,00,000 from the Defendant as the head of the above national bank in his/her name, and at the same time receives solicitation as to the case where the public official handles.

B. On the 11th of the same month, after receiving the money as above 2-A of the above 2-A, it refers to the currency with the above victim again, and the above 40,000,000 won was required with the above ro funds, and the defendant paid 10,00,000 won in lieu of the above ro funds. On November 2 of the same year of the same year, the victim requested the non-indicted 2, who was then transferred the money to the non-indicted 2, and received 10,000,000 won from the above ro funds under the above 10,000 won with the above ro funds, and received money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation for the case handled by the public official at the same time, and since the military court approved the amendment of the bill of amendment to the indictment, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained in this regard.

Therefore, without examining the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the military prosecutor, the judgment of the court below ex officio is reversed pursuant to Articles 428 and 431 of the Military Court Act, and since it is deemed sufficient for the military court to render the original judgment based on the records, the court below is determined as follows through pleadings pursuant to Article 435 of the same Act.

The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence against the defendant recognized by the military court is as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below except for the alteration of facts constituting an offense in the judgment of the court below [Revised facts constituting an offense] under Article 439 of the same Act. Therefore, all of them shall be cited in accordance with

【Revised Crime】

In fact, notwithstanding the fact that there is no intention or ability to consult with the public official of the State, with regard to the substitution of two parcels of land owned by the State, which is mixed between the above military official site of the State,

A. On October 11, 2004, 2004, the Defendant received money and valuables from the Defendant to receive KRW 30,000,000 from the Defendant as the head of a national bank in his/her name and receive money from the public official, and at the same time, receive money and valuables under the pretext that he/she receives money from the Defendant to receive KRW 30,00,000 from the Defendant as the head of the above national bank in his/her name, and at the same time receives solicitation as to the case where the public official handles.

B. On the 11th of the same month, after receiving the money as above 2-A of the above 2-A, it is false to conclude that the money was paid in lieu of 10,000,000 won because it was required by the above 40,00,000 won with the above Rovi funds, and it was paid in lieu of 10,00,000 won on November 2 of the same year by requesting the victim to the non-indicted 2, who was later a part of the money, and received money and valuables from the non-indicted 2 as above by receiving 10,00,000 won from the above rovi funds to the head of the above national bank under the name of the non-indicted 2, and at the same time,

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 111 of the Attorney-at-Law Act (the point of receipt of money and valuables for each Public Official Handling Affairs) and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud)

2. Competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Punishments prescribed for more severe fraud between the crimes of violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act in Section 2 at the time of sale and the crimes of fraud)

3. Selection of punishment;

Each Imprisonment Selection

4. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes with Punishment in Aggravated Punishment)

5. Calculation in the number of days under detention before sentencing;

Article 57 (Inclusion of 93 Days in Criminal Act)

6. Suspension of execution;

Articles 62(1) and 51 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Article 62(1) and 51 of the Criminal Act; Article 62(1) is the first offender; Article 51 of the Act was fully recovered; Article 51 of the Act was recognized as having contributed to the military and received total

7. Additional collection:

Article 116 (Value of Cash of 65 million won in Case of Crimes of Receiving Money and Valuables for Requests for Handling Affairs of Public Officials in the Market)

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Jung-gu, Gyeong-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Military Court of the Republic of Korea