2016Gohap937 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), Fraud

A

The highest heading (prosecutions) and the case in court shall be tried.

Law Firm B

Attorney C

February 3, 2017

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Criminal 1)

1. Crimes against victims D;

A. On April 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D that “The Defendant may purchase the her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her hers her her her her her

However, in fact, the husband of the above E was a person who has no relation with the Emers company, and the Defendant had no record of purchasing Emers bank at low price, and had no ability to purchase Emers bank at low price. At the time, the Defendant was at least 200 million won with no special property or fixed income, and it was difficult for the Defendant to raise the cost of living.

Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; and (b) transferred KRW 23,080,000 to the Defendant’s new bank account on April 7, 2015 for the purchase cost of Emermeras bank; (c) and (d) received transfer or delivery of KRW 53,910,000 in total on 23 occasions from around that time to January 13, 2016, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

B. On August 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant, while making a telephone call with the victim, may import the Memers room from a low level and sell it to the victim so that he would benefit from selling it in Korea.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to purchase the Memers in a low manner.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, was transferred KRW 14,4920,00 from the victim to the Defendant’s new bank account on August 17, 2015, under the pretext of investment in Memersa sales.

C. On November 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “F is operating “F” by making a phone call to the victim, and if an investment is made in this place, 36% per annum can be paid.”

However, in fact, there was no person operating ‘F' among the defendants', and even if the defendant received money from the victim, he did not intend to return the money to the victim after creating profits by using it.

Nevertheless, on November 20, 2015, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) transferred KRW 20 million from the victim to the Defendant’s new bank account under the pretext of investment; and (c) received a total of KRW 30 million from cash and received KRW 10 million.

D. On December 2015, the Defendant’s phone call from the victim to the victim, with respect to “F” in relation to the victim’s “F in which four investments are made, the monthly income amounting to KRW 300,000 per month to KRW 500,000,000,000 per month, and less than KRW 300,000 per month to KRW 40,000 per month.

However, there is a false statement to the effect that some of the investors recover 60 million won of investment, which should be supplemented by the wind. If the above money is lent, it will be repaid after one week.

However, ‘F' is an investment entity that does not exist, and even if the defendant receives money from the victim, he/she did not have an intent or ability to pay it.

Nevertheless, on December 4, 2015, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received from the victim each transfer of KRW 40 million to the Defendant’s new bank account on December 4, 2015 and KRW 20 million to the same account on December 7, 2015.

2. Crimes against victims G;

A. A. Around July 24, 2015, the Defendant sold one unit of 13 million won for the victim G via the above D. However, the victim sent the intent to the effect that “the Defendant is not against the mind” through the above D.

Accordingly, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that the Defendant would sell the above door to the victim in KRW 15 million.

However, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to deliver the price to the victim even if he sells the bags received from the victim due to excessive debt, including the above D debt.

Nevertheless, on August 30, 2015, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, was issued one of the above provisional measures equivalent to KRW 13 million at the market price from the victim around August 30, 2015.

B. On December 9, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would pay money to make investments. If the Defendant borrowed KRW 30 million until December 28, 2015, he/she would make reimbursement until December 28, 2015, and one part of the part of the part that is equivalent to KRW 2 million.”

However, even if the defendant received money from the victim, he had no intention or ability to repay it.

Nevertheless, on December 9, 2015, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received KRW 30 million from the victim to the Defendant’s new bank account.

C. On January 1, 2016, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “The Defendant would receive money from any person to purchase Mamers bags, and that he/she would not purchase Mamers bags, and that he/she would file a complaint against the victim. If he/she lends money to manage this, he/she would pay by no later than February 1, 2016.”

However, even if the defendant borrowed money from others, he did not have the intention or ability to repay it until the agreed date.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 5 million from the victim to the non-indicted H’s account on January 8, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

【Each Facts of No. 1 at the Time of Sales】

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement by the prosecution concerning D;

1. The police interrogation protocol against the accused (including the fourth and 21 CD statements in the list of prosecutor evidence (hereinafter referred to as the "satisfy"));

1. Statement of the police officer to I;

1. Transfer certificate (No. 2), recording (No. 3), confirmation of facts (No. 4), additional data to be submitted by the complainants (number 9), additional data to be submitted (number 10), data to reply to a warrant of search and seizure verification (number 11), new bank J (No. 12), additional data to be submitted by the complainants (No. 14), additional data to be submitted by the complainants (No. 15) (No. 15), additional data to be submitted by the complainants (No. 16), personal credit information of the accuseds (No. 17), suspect, personal credit information (No. 20) and receipts of temporary purchase (No. 10)

1. The chief of the complaint;

【Each Facts of No. 2 at the Time of Sales】

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. An interrogation protocol of the police against the accused (including the fourth, fourth, and twenty-one (D) each time);

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. The New Bank K (No. 12), the personal credit information inquiry consent (No. 16), the suspect personal credit information (no. 17), the suspect's personal credit information (no. 23), the certificate of transfer (No. 24), the money borrowed (No. 25), and the confirmation of fact (No. 25);

1. The chief executive officer (service 22);

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 3(1)2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (as a whole, Article 1-2(1) of the Criminal Act), Article 347(1) of each Criminal Act (as a whole, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (as a result, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (as a whole, Article 1-3

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act shall be aggravated for concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed by the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) with the largest penalty

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., favorable circumstances, etc., for the following reasons for sentencing)

Reasons for sentencing

1. The scope of applicable sentences: Imprisonment for a period of one year and six months to twenty-two years;

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

[Determination of Punishment] General Fraud type 3 (at least 50 million won, less than 5 billion won, and the amount of profit according to the method of dealing with the same kind of offense)

[Special Aggravation] None of the elements of aggravation and mitigation

[Scope of Recommendation] Three to Six years of imprisonment (Basic Area)

3. Determination of sentence;

The Defendant acquired approximately KRW 800,000 from the victims by means of false words, such as purchasing scamblings to the victims, or making them gain profits by investing in capitals operated by a scambling. In light of the method of crime, period of crime, and scale of damage, etc. In addition, the crime of this case appears to have been suffering from severe economic and mental pain, but the victims are punished by the victims due to their failure to cause damage to the victims. In full view of these circumstances, it is inevitable to punish the Defendant with severe penalty equivalent to their responsibility.

However, the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes, thereby contravening his mistake. In addition, the Defendant intended to purchase some of the money actually received from the victim D, and paid some of the money received from the said victim or paid the money in the name of profits. On the other hand, the Defendant is an initial offender who has no record of criminal punishment.

In full view of all kinds of sentencing conditions shown in the arguments in this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., which are disadvantageous or favorable to the defendant, the defendant may choose a sentence lower than the lower limit of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines, and determine the sentence like the order.

Judge Kim Jae-han

Judges, Assistants

Judge 00 Ba1

1) The prosecutor corrected or corrected part of the facts charged (including the attached list of crimes) according to the facts obtained through the examination of evidence without the amendment process to the extent that it does not disadvantage the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense.

A person shall be appointed.