Defendant

Maximum heading, Kim Hyun-chul (prosecution), and a public trial

Attorney Jind Jind (Korean)

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Of the facts charged in this case, the obstruction of another’s exercise of rights is acquitted.

Punishment of the crime

"2018 Highest 2042"

The Defendant, a limited liability company, Nonindicted 11 (hereinafter “Nonindicted 11”) and a limited liability company, a person in charge of overall affairs concerning the management and operation of a branch-in vehicle, and Nonindicted 30 and Nonindicted 31 of the victim, who are Nonindicted 11, is the victim Nonindicted 32 and Nonindicted 33 of the victim, who are a tourist bus company, in fact, is a person in charge of overall affairs concerning the management and operation of the branch-in vehicle, and the victim Nonindicted 32 and Nonindicted 33 are the △

The defendant has a duty to manage the vehicles in good faith, not to obtain the consent of the owner of the land, to provide the vehicle as security, and to preserve the vehicle with the vehicle without the consent of the owner of the land.

1. Crimes against the victim Nonindicted 30

On February 3, 2016, the Defendant received the first loan from Nonindicted 7 Depository in violation of his/her duties in violation of his/her duties, and then the victim would offer the buses that he/she left Nonindicted 11 as security (the provision of pre-loan security), and around February 12, 2016, received the loan of KRW 27 million from the above community credit cooperative on or around February 12, 2016, and provided the tourist bus to the above community credit cooperative at will, on or around March 3, 2016, arbitrarily offered the tourist bus to the victim as security, and set up a mortgage on the mortgagee’s non-indicted 7 safe, claim amount of KRW 324 million, and the debtor’s non-indicted 11.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 27 million, and suffered damages equivalent to the same amount to the victim.

2. Crimes against the victim Nonindicted 31

On April 6, 2016, the Defendant received a first loan from Nonindicted 7 Depository in violation of his/her duties at an aesthetic place, and the victim would offer the bus that was left to Nonindicted 11 as security, and around April 6, 2016, borrowed KRW 30 million from the said Saemaul Savings Depository as security, and then, on May 10, 2016, provided the tourist bus to the said Saemaul Savings Depository as security for the mortgagee Nonindicted 7 Depository, the bond value of KRW 36 million, and the debtor Nonindicted 11.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 30 million and suffered damages equivalent to the same amount from the victim.

3. Crimes against the victim Nonindicted 32

On June 2016, when the Defendant was given a first loan from Nonindicted 7’s depository in violation of his duties at an unclaimed place, and the victim was given a loan to △△ Tourism as security, and around June 17, 2016, the Defendant arbitrarily borrowed KRW 110 million from the said community credit cooperative, and then, on June 20, 2016, the Defendant provided the tourist bus, which is a vehicle for the victim’s location (bus number 24 omitted), as a joint security, to the said community credit cooperative, along with the tourist bus (bus number 25 omitted), with the mortgagee Nonindicted 7, the credit amount of KRW 132,00,00,000, and the debtor’s tourism.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired financial benefits equivalent to 10 million won, excluding other tourist bus loans, and suffered financial losses equivalent to 10 million won by the victim.

4. Crimes against the victim Nonindicted 33

On October 2016, 2016, the Defendant had a duty to lend the amount requested by the victim to use it in line with its original purpose and not provide the bus as security for the excess amount of KRW 12 million, after receiving a loan of KRW 30,000,000,000 from the victim to the △△ Tourism as security, because the Defendant was in need of money from the victim's directors, and the Defendant received a request from the victim to pay the vehicle installments of KRW 18,000,000,000,000 from the victim.

Nevertheless, on November 25, 2016, the Defendant took out a loan of KRW 35 million more than the amount delegated by the victim from Nonindicted 7’s safe around November 25, 2016, and on December 2, 2016, the Defendant established a mortgage on the tourist bus, which is a vehicle for the victim’s taking advantage of (b) the mortgagee Nonindicted 7 safe, the bond value of KRW 42 million, and the debtor ○○ Tourism. The Defendant arbitrarily used KRW 23 million excluding KRW 12 million out of the loan.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 23 million, and suffered damages equivalent to the same amount to the victim.

"2018 Highest 2693"

The Defendant is the actual operator of Nonindicted Party 11, who is a transportation business entity in the Jeonbuk-gun ( Address 10 omitted).

No act of issuing a tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act without supplying goods or services shall be allowed.

Nevertheless, on April 4, 2017, the Defendant issued a false tax invoice stating KRW 72,727,272 as if he/she sold a transit-type vehicle (city No. 27 omitted) to △△ Tourism.

In addition, the Defendant issued a false tax invoice stating the total supply value of KRW 1,463,636,356 on 21 occasions, such as the list of crimes in the attached Table, without supplying goods or services from that time until May 8, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

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

1. Each police statement on Nonindicted 30, Nonindicted 32, Nonindicted 33, and Nonindicted 31

1. Nonindicted 71’s written answer

1. Full certificate of the registered matters of the corporation, the register of automobiles (In four copies), the details of financial transactions (verification of the actual amount of loans), the written accusation, the copy of the tax invoice, the copy of the report of completion of investigation into tax offenses, the register of automobiles, the statement of acquisition of depreciable assets of buildings, the specifications of acquisition of depreciable assets of buildings, each automobile registration certificate, each automobile transfer certificate, each transfer contract, and each transfer management contract, the register of automobiles, the vehicle register, the vehicle driving log, the investigation report (an analysis of the register of vehicles for sale and non-indicted 72, the former investigator non-indicted 72, the investigation report (in the former investigator non-indicted 28), the register of automobiles, the register of automobiles, the investigation report (in the case of four business offices, including non-indicted 11, etc.), the response to the request for business cooperation, the investigation report (in the case of accompanying documents, such as corporate register, etc., including Non-indicted 11, which operated the suspect);

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 356 and 355 of the Criminal Act; Article 10 (3) 1 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for one month to 13 years;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Class 1 crime;

【Determination of Punishment】

Embezzlement and Breach of Trust (Type 2) No less than KRW 100 million, but less than KRW 500,000,000.

【Special Convicted Person】

【Recommendation Area and Scope of Recommendations】

Basic area, one year to three years of imprisonment;

[No person who is a general person]

(b) Second violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act;

【Determination of Punishment】

. Tax crimes: Acceptance, etc. of a false tax invoice (type 1) less than three billion won;

【Special Convicted Person】

【Recommendation Area and Scope of Recommendations】

Basic territory, 6 months to 1 years of imprisonment;

[No person who is a general person]

(c) Scope of recommendations according to the standards for handling multiple crimes: One year to three years (the upper limit of crimes 1 + the upper limit of crimes 1/2).

3. Determination of sentence:

○ The Defendant is making confessions as to each of the crimes of this case.

○ Not agreed with the victim of the instant crime, and the illegal gains from the instant crime also exist.

○ Other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing indicated in the record, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, the background and result of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged as to obstruction of another’s exercise of rights

On November 19, 2015, the Defendant entered into a credit transaction agreement to pay KRW 714,240 to 714,240 for the purpose of the credit period, interest rate, KRW 7.6%, KRW 814,815, and KRW 35,560,000, and provided the said vehicle as security at a sales store of franchis located in the Jung-gu, Daejeon ( Address 2 omitted) and (vehicle number omitted) for the purpose of purchasing vehicles.

Since then, the Defendant paid the principal and interest each month in accordance with the above loan agreement, and did not pay it from November 2, 2017, and thereafter, the Defendant lost the due interest due to the loss of time due to the receipt of the peremptory notice from the victim of temporary payment at that time, and returned the vehicle. However, from November 10 to November 18, 2017, the Defendant arbitrarily provided the said troke vehicle to Nonindicted 12, including the Defendant’s sports and Ecoos, as security.

Accordingly, the defendant concealed the goods of the defendant, which is the object of the victim's right, and interfered with the victim's exercise of right.

2. Defendant's assertion;

The Defendant delivered the trokeer vehicle owned by the Defendant to Nonindicted 4, and Nonindicted 4 agreed that Nonindicted 4 shall pay the unpaid installments on the trokeer vehicle. Nonindicted 4 offered it as security to Nonindicted 12 in the state that Nonindicted 4 did not pay the installments, and the Defendant did not have any intention to obstruct another’s exercise of rights.

3. Determination

We examine whether the defendant borrowed from non-indicted 12 to 30 million won a vehicle in the name of the defendant and provided it as security and concealed it.

First of all, when Nonindicted 4 formally borrowed KRW 10 million from Nonindicted 12 on November 10, 2017 from Nonindicted 12, at least on November 18, 2017, Nonindicted 4 appears to have consented to the provision of security for vehicles by Nonindicted 4’s trokeler around November 18, 2017, and thus, it seems to have satisfied the elements for the obstruction of one’s exercise of rights.

However, with respect to whether the Defendant could have had intention to interfere with the exercise of rights, it is difficult to recognize that Nonindicted 4 had an intention to use the foregoing trophal vehicle in the name of Nonindicted 4, and that it was recognized by Nonindicted 4’s respective written statement of the police statement about Nonindicted 12 and partial statement of the witness Nonindicted 4, namely, ① Nonindicted 4’s motive to borrow from Nonindicted 12 is to repay the Defendant’s obligation to Nonindicted 4, Nonindicted 4’s affirmative action in borrowing, and the Defendant appears to have been passive cooperation in borrowing. ② The Defendant delivered the said trophal vehicle to Nonindicted 4 before several months prior to the instant crime, and operated it. In light of the fact that Nonindicted 4’s written statement of the use of the trophal vehicle and the written statement of Nonindicted 4’s personal seal impression and personal seal impression to transfer the name of the instant trophal vehicle, it was difficult to recognize that Nonindicted 4 provided the above trophal vehicle with Nonindicted 4’s signature and written statement of change to the trophal.

4. Conclusion

Thus, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judges Park Sang-hoon

(attached Form omitted)