2014Gohap942 Fraud, Violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act

Park ○ (62 - 1), Instructors

Kim Yong- rules (prosecutions) and prevention type (Trial)

Attorney Park Jong-young (Korean National Assembly)

May 14, 2015

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1,600,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The amount equivalent to the above additional collection charge shall be ordered to be paid provisionally.

Facts of crime

The defendant is a registered interpreter of Incheon District Prosecutors' Office, who has been in charge of English interpretation in Incheon District Prosecutors' Office and Suwon District Prosecutors' Office.

1. Fraud;

A. On August 28, 2014, the Defendant, at the waiting room of the ○○○○○○○○○, a victim of the instant crime, who was investigated as a suspect in the instant public prosecutor’s office located in the Suwon-si Office located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, 120 p.m. on the 120 p.m., the Defendant paid personal burden on the victim’s ○○○○○○○ (a volunteer) who was a victim of the instant public prosecutor’s office, to interpret the person as a volunteer without compensation. As such, the Defendant paid personal compensation for this issue.

However, the defendant received the prescribed daily and hourly interpretation expenses in accordance with the public official travel expenses regulations, travel expenses, accommodation expenses, food expenses, etc. according to the government's regulations on the payment of expenses for reference to the Ministry of Justice.

Therefore, in other words, 30,00 won was received from the victim as a guard and the defrauded was obtained.

B. On August 29, 2014, the Defendant, at the places indicated in the foregoing paragraph (a) around August 29, 2014, deceptioned the victims who were killed as a suspect in a drug case by the aforementioned methods, and acquired them by fraud, on September 2, 2014: 00, by receiving KRW 40,000 from the victim as the Defendant’s agricultural bank account for expenses.

2. Violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act, and fraud;

피고인은 2014 . 8 . 28 . 오후경 위 검찰청 내 최○○ 검사 사무실에서 마약 사건의 피 의자로 조사를 받던 피해자 아일랜드인 ◈ ◈◈◈◈에 대한 통역 업무를 수행하 던 중 피해자가 미국인과 결혼하여 미국 국적을 취득하려고 한다는 사실을 알게 되었 고 , 피해자에 대한 조사가 종료되어 피해자가 귀가한 후 담당 수사관인 김○○로부터 ' ◈◇◈◇◈◇◈◇에 대한 사건은 대한민국의 전과 기록이 미국에 통보되지 아니하여 미국 국적을 취득하는 데는 아무런 문제가 없을 것이다 ' 라는 취지의 말을 우연히 듣게 된 것을 기화로 , 피해자를 상대로 담당 수사관에게 피해자의 대한민국 내 전과기록이 미국으로 통보되지 않도록 청탁해 주겠다는 명목으로 금전을 편취하기로 마음먹었다 .

On September 15, 2014, the Defendant was able to exercise influence over the disposition of the instant case by communicating the victim at the same night. On September 3, 2014, the Defendant called the victim at the victim on the same day, and then called the victim at the victim on September 15, 2014, and thus, the Defendant was able to pay compensation for the oil value and road expenses individually. The Defendant was able to do so on September 21, 2014. The Defendant was 5:0,000 won in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, 97 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, 5:00 won in order to request the victim to return compensation to the victim, and the Defendant continued to receive 100,000 won in advance from the victim on September 5, 200, “100,000 won in the instant case to request the investigator at the public prosecutor’s office to notify the facts within the Republic of Korea.

Therefore, around September 30, 2014: 21: around 45, 201, Dong-dong ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ was issued from the victim.

As a result, the defendant, by deceiving the victim, acquired a total of 1.6 million won, and at the same time, received money and valuables under the pretext of soliciting or arranging the cases or affairs that public officials take.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. ○○○○○○○○○, 2002, and the prosecution prosecution's prosecution's prosecution's prosecution's prosecution's prosecution's prosecution's prosecution's office

Written Statement

1. Seizure records;

1. A criminal investigation report (Attachment to photographs of details of deposits from the account), and a criminal investigation report (Attachment to the details of receipt of interpretation expenses of a suspect);

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts;

Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Code (each fraud) and Article 111 (1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act (the acceptance of money and valuables under the pretext of solicitation)

of this section)

1. Competition;

형법 제40조 , 제50조 ( 피해자 ◈◇◈◇◈◇◈◇에 대한 사기죄와 변호사법위반죄 상

Punishment provided for more severe frauds

1. Selection of penalty;

Each Imprisonment Selection

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (victims Who Has the largest Criminality)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes with respect to the penalty prescribed in fraud

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating Conditions among the Reasons for Sentencing)

1. Additional collection:

Article 116 of the Attorney-at-Law Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

1. The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for one month to 15 years; and

2. Application of the sentencing criteria (the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act and fraud referred to in paragraph (2) of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment shall be conceptual concurrence

In the relationship, each crime of fraud provided for in Paragraph (1) of the judgment that the sentencing criteria are not applicable.

Only the lower limit of the recommended sentence to which the sentencing criteria apply shall be considered)

(a) Paragraph 1-b of the holding

[Extent of Recommendation] General Fraud Type 1 (less than KRW 100 million)

【No Special Convicted Person】

(b) Paragraph (1) of the holding;

[Extent of Recommendation] General Frauds No. 1 (less than KRW 100 million)

[Special Mitigation] In a case where punishment is not granted or a considerable part of damage is recovered;

(c) The scope of final sentence due to the aggravation of multiple offenses: Six months of imprisonment to two years (the upper limit of crimes No. 1) + (1 and June).

2. 1/2 ( June) of the upper limit of crimes

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than eight months and two years of suspended sentence; and

This case is very poor in view of the fact that the defendant, while acting as an interpreter of an investigative agency, acquired money against the foreigner victim who is vulnerable to the crime, and in particular, in the case of a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act, it is a serious crime that seriously damages the trust of the affairs handled by the public officials. Considering these circumstances, it is necessary to punish the defendant.

However, the amount obtained by the Defendant from victims is relatively little, and is deep against his criminal act. Moreover, even though it did not reach an agreement with the victims, the Defendant deposited some amount of damage. The Defendant did not have any criminal record other than that sentenced once to a fine.

In addition, considering the defendant's age, occupation, character and conduct, family relationship, the circumstances and results of the crime of this case, and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, it is decided as ordered.

The presiding judge shall have jurisdiction over the judge

판사 김샛별

Judges Shin Sung-sung