logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2020.09.16 2019고단60
사기등
Text

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

10,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

The amount equivalent to the above additional charges.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Power of the Defendant] The Defendant was appointed as a public official in technical service in the prosecution around 1976 and served in the Jeonju District Prosecutors' Office and Seoul District Prosecutors' Office until 1988.

Since the retirement of a person who was the head of the office of attorney-at-law from the time of 2008, who was working as the head of the office of attorney-at-law, was able to perform and attend as if he retired as an investigator of the office of attorney-at-law and to resolve the solicitation for using his career. On June 16, 1990, the Seoul District Court was sentenced to a fine of 80,000 won for the violation of the Attorney-at-law Act on March 17, 1998 and was sentenced to a fine of 5,00,000 won for the same crime in the military support of the Jeonju District Court on June 24, 2010.

【Criminal Facts】

1. On August 2006, the Defendant committed the crime against the victim B, who was aware of while serving together in the attorney office in the Seocho-gu Seoul Central District Court C near the Seoul Central District Court located in Seocho-gu, Seoul Central District Court, that “the situation of the prosecutor’s office should be well known because he works as the prosecutory investigator. It is planned to employ a driver at the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office, and it is expected that the child would be employed on the face of the prime page of the rain funds.” However, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to receive money from the victim from the beginning and to employ the victim’s children as a public official, or to do so.”

Nevertheless, on August 21, 2006, the Defendant received 3,50,000 won from the victim’s account via the Agricultural Cooperative Account under the name of Do on August 21, 2006, and there was a false statement to the effect that “The date of issuance is the date when there is one person in the Ministry of Justice for 4 and 5 years.”

On March 2012, the Defendant called the victim by telephone at a closed space on March 2012, the Defendant “to enable a person in charge of personnel management to be employed in a lump sum with children by resorting to a person in charge of personnel management.”

arrow