2018Gohap770 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)

A

Radice iron (prosecution), a summary (public trial)

Attorney B (Korean National Assembly)

October 4, 2018

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive. To order the accused to provide community service for 120 hours.

Criminal facts

The defendant has its head office in the five floors in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and has been in office as the chairperson in D (hereinafter referred to as "D"), a corporation for the purpose of events and event agency business, etc., the victim E (hereinafter referred to as "E") has its head office in the F, the victim E (hereinafter referred to as "E") has its head office in the Chungcheong-to-Sto-Sto-Sto-Sto-Sto-Sto-Sto-Sto-S to-S to

On April 20, 2017, the Defendant issued a bill in the name of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., and tried to prepare the company fund by doing so, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would immediately return the bill to the G Co., Ltd., by transferring the electronic bill of KRW 4 billion to the Credit Resolution Co., Ltd., which would reduce the discount of the bill through the Capital Co., Ltd.” The Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The bill of KRW 2 billion from the Capital Co., Ltd. would be secured as security and at a discounted rate of KRW 2 billion for the remaining 2 billion bill.”

However, the defendant was not a person operating the LAD in substance, and even if he received an electronic bill in the name of the LAD in the amount of KRW 4 billion from G, he did not have any intent or ability to discount a bill through LAD by financing the entire bill through a clean Fac Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “SABD”) with the capacity to pay the discount amounting to KRW 2 billion, and paying the discount amount to the remainder of the bill to the victim even though he was planned to do so by the defendant in the middle, even though he was planned to do so, he did not have any intent or ability to do so by hiding the victim.

On April 20, 2017, the Defendant deceptioned G, and caused G to issue four copies of electronic bills in the name of the K-A-A-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the accused;

1. The police suspect interrogation protocol of H;

1. Each police statement made to G and I;

1. Written statement by J;

1. Investigation report (report on attachment of results from cell phone analysis owned by a suspect A), investigation report (report on attachment of text messages);

1. Full certificate of registered matters, certificate of undertaking (as of April 17, 2017), written request for discount of bills, written agreement (as of April 18, 2017), endorsement information, each endorsement information, written dialogue between complainant and A, (ju) business registration certificate, certificate of entire registered matters of a stock company, business agreement (as of April 18, 2017), bill of endorsement and bill of endorsement, and bill of endorsement;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following consideration for the reasons for sentencing):

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following grounds for sentencing has been repeatedly taken into consideration for favorable circumstances)

1. Social service order;

Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. Reasons for sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months to fifteen years;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] General Fraud. Type 3 (at least 500 million won, less than 5 billion won)

[Special Mitigation] If the risk of damage is not substantially realized;

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months to 4 years (Mitigation)

3. Determination of sentence;

The receipt of a bill in the name of the victim by deceiving G, even though the Defendant was unable to express his/her intent or ability to immediately return the bill when the Defendant was either at the discount of the victim or at the discount of the bill through a capital company, constitutes fraud. The Defendant had a number of previous criminal records, including one previous criminal record, and the Defendant committed the instant crime without being subject to the suspended sentence due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, even though he/she was subject to the suspended sentence due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. Furthermore, the Defendant was unable to recover the entire electronic bill in the name of the victim until now.

However, the Defendant appears to recognize and reflect the overall crime of this case. Of the bill issued by the Defendant, KRW 2.268 billion, the issue value acquired by the Defendant was recovered without any damage, and the considerable amount was recovered or deemed to have been recovered in excess of the issue value. As such, the actual amount of damage suffered by the victim seems to fall short of the issue value of the bill. In addition, in the records, the benefits acquired by the Defendant through the instant crime are not verified differently. In addition, in addition, in addition to the above circumstances, the punishment is determined as per the order, taking into account the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, circumstances after the crime, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relations, etc., and the various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant argument.

The presiding judge, judge Kim Jong-tae

Judges Park Jae-ran

Judges Chief Democratic

1) The victim recovered, without loss, the bill of KRW 2.268 billion out of the bill of KRW 4 billion, and the bill of KRW 700,000 is KRW 8 billion.

A statement was made that payment was made and recovered (the witness G’s legal statement and each police statement of G). The remaining bills have not been recovered, but the remaining bills have not yet been recovered.

In light of the above collection price of the Promissory Notes and the fact that E currently is in legal management, it is possible to recover the amount much less than the issue value.

I seem to appear.