2013Gohap1026 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement), fraud;

Violation of the Employment Insurance Act

A

Demurrers, semi-public trials

Law Firm B (Attorney in charge C, D)

April 11, 2014

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

The defendant is the representative director of the E-A-U.S. Housing Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "E") and the FF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "F"), and is conducting the business of leasing and sublet the H apartment, officetels and commercial buildings in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "G"), taking overall charge of the business of the above companies such as the deposit and withdrawal of funds

1. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) of Victims E;

On May 14, 200, the Defendant received 30 million won from the real estate representativeJ to the bank account in the name of the victim E (K). On the same day, the Defendant voluntarily consumeded 10 million won out of the money for the personal use of the Defendant. From around that time to June 15, 201, the Defendant embezzled 1,263,017,043 won for total of 281 funds owned by the victim who had been in custody on duty for 281 occasions, as shown in the List of Crimes (EF) from around that time to June 15, 201.

2. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) against victims F;

On July 22, 2010, the Defendant embezzled KRW 12,577,40 from the new bank account (M) in the name of the victim F to the national bank account (O) in the name of N for the U.S. travel expenses of the family members of L families, as well as arbitrarily remitted KRW 12,577,400 from the new bank account in the name of N. From around that time until July 10, 2012, the Defendant embezzled KRW 1,114,291,93, total amount of funds owned by the victim who was under business custody over a total of 106 occasions, such as the list of crimes (FF embezzlement) in the attached Table of Crimes (FF embezzlement).

3. Fraud and violation of the Employment Insurance Act;

When completing the master’s degree course, the Defendant entered the aforementioned school students by falsely registering them as E and F’s employees, and paid them scholarships with the company’s funds. As such, the Defendant conspired with the above school students to receive unemployment benefits by pretending that they were retired while working in E and F.

A. Q, a student of Qua’s illegal receipt of unemployment benefits under the name of Q Q Q, and a defrauded university, around October 10, 201, around 31, at the Seoul Western District Office located on the fourth floor of the building of 63-8 Sam Changpon, Mapo-gu Seoul, Seoul, Seoul, and Seoul, the District Employment and Labor Agency: (a) prepared an application for recognition of eligibility as if he/she was retired from office due to the reduction of the workplace; (b) received the application from any employee who may be in charge of such fact; and (c) received it from the victim of Q Q from the Republic of Korea with the single bank account in the name of the above Q Q Q as job-seeking benefits for the purpose of job-seeking benefits among unemployment benefits; and (d) received 3.6 million won in total from the victim of the said Q.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with Q Q, received a total of 3.6 million won of unemployment benefits by fraud or other improper means, and acquired it by fraud.

B. On November 14, 2011, S, a student of SP university, shall prepare an application for recognition of recipient status as if he/she worked in F and was voluntarily recommended due to the reduction of the workplace on September 30, 201, at the Seoul Northern District Office of Employment and Labor in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Seoul, for recognition of recipient status: (a) receive the application from the victim of the unemployment benefits from the Republic of Korea to the new bank account (T) in the name of the above S for job-seeking benefits; and (b) receive the same from the victim of the unemployment benefits from the Republic of Korea to the new bank (T) account in the name of the above S for job-seeking benefits; and (c) receive from the victim of the unemployment benefits.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with S, received the total amount of 3,670,260 won of unemployment benefits by fraud or other improper means, and acquired it by fraud.

C. On January 3, 2012, U.S. students who are U’s illegal supply and demand of U’s unemployment benefits and defraudeded PP university shall prepare an application for recognition of eligibility for benefits at the Chungcheong District Office of the Daejeon Regional Employment and Labor Agency located in 507, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, a culture-based 507, as if he had worked in E and had been recommended due to corporate management difficulties on September 30, 2011, and received them from the victims of unemployment benefits from the Republic of Korea to the new bank account (V) in the above U’s name under the pretext of job-seeking benefits among unemployment benefits. Such payments were received from the victims of the same fact.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with U, received a total of 4.8 million won of unemployment benefits by fraud or other improper means, and acquired it by fraud.

(d) Illegal supply of and demand for W unemployment benefits under the name of W;

(1) Around April 7, 2010, W, a student of the P University, prepared an application for recognition of eligibility for benefits at the Seoul Eastern District Office located in Songpa-gu Seoul, Seoul, and prepared an application for recognition of eligibility for benefits as if he/she had worked in E and had been subject to recommendation on March 31, 2010, and received it from the victim to the Japanese bank account (X) in the name of the said W in the name of job-seeking benefits from the Republic of Korea. Accordingly, W, a student of the P University, was transferred from the Republic of Korea to the victim’s Japanese bank account (X) in the name of job-seeking benefits from among unemployment benefits.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with W, received a total of 3,560,000 won of unemployment benefits by fraud or other improper means, and acquired it by fraud.

(2) Around October 18, 2011, W prepared an application for recognition of eligibility for benefits at the Seoul Northern District Office of the Seoul Regional Employment and Labor Agency as if it had worked in F, and had been dismissed on September 30, 201, and received from the victim’s Republic of Korea an application for recognition of eligibility for benefits. It received from the victim’s employees who may have knowledge of such fact from the Republic of Korea to the Japanese bank account (X) in the said W’s name as job-seeking benefits out of unemployment benefits. It received the amount of KRW 320,00,000 on November 32, 201, from the victim’s first bank account in the said W’s name as job-seeking benefits.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with W, received a total of 3.6 million won of unemployment benefits by fraud or other improper means, and acquired it by fraud.

E. On January 26, 2012, Y, a student of the Y-type illegal supply and demand of unemployment benefits and the YP university, Y: (a) prepared an application for recognition of eligibility for benefits at the Seoul Northern District Office of Employment and Labor; (b) prepared an application for recognition of eligibility for benefits as if he/she had worked in F; and (c) received it from the victim of unemployment benefits to the Agricultural Bank account in the above Y’s name, for job-seeking benefits, under the pretext of job-seeking benefits, as if he/she had been subjected to the reduction of workplace due to business difficulties on September 30, 2011; and (d) received them from the victim of the Y to the said Y’s account in the name of job-seeking benefits.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with Y, received a total of 3.6 million won of unemployment benefits by fraud or other improper means, and acquired it by fraud.

(f) On November 9, 2011, AA, a student of the National University for Illegal Supply of and Demand for Unemployment Benefits under the name of AA, prepared an application for recipient qualification recognition as if he/she had been retired from office due to business difficulties on September 30, 201, at the Jeonjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City 251, the Jeonjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Do 251, and then received from the victim an application for recipient qualification recognition as if he/she had worked in E, and then received from the victim under the name of the National Bank (AB) under the name of the above A for job-seeking benefits from among unemployment benefits, and received from the victim the total amount of KRW 8,830,830,870,910,910,870,910,870,970,910,910,90,97,930,94,97,305,196,305,96,47

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with A, received a total of 4,665,590 won of unemployment benefits by fraud or other improper means, and acquired it by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

【Public Notice Nos. 1 and 2】

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each prosecutor's statement made to AC, AD, AE, and AF;

1. Details of provisional payment by each representative director, data on each financial transaction, etc., details of financial transaction, daily mail and monthly work;

1. Each investigation report (Evidence Nos. 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 39, 41, 43, 101, 104, 106);

【3rd period】

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by each prosecutor of the prosecution against Q, S, U, W,Y, and AA;

1. Details of payment of each unemployment benefits, applications for recognition of each eligibility for benefits, applications for recognition of each eligibility for unemployment recognition, personal benefits, inquiries, references, resumes, each scholarship certificate, details of subscription to national health insurance, and certificates of performance of each deposit transaction;

1. Each investigation report (the sequence 3,121 of the evidence list);

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts;

A. The point of embezzlement

1) Article 3(1)2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (amended by Act No. 11304, Feb. 10, 2012); Articles 356 and 355(1) of the Criminal Act by comprehensively covering the part of embezzlement against victim E

2) The part concerning embezzlement of victim F

In general, Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act

B. Fraud

1) Each part of fraud by deceitation of unemployment benefits by Qua, S, U, Y, and AA

Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act inclusive for each unemployment benefits contractor

2) Each fraud by defraudation of W unemployment benefits

Article 347, Paragraph 1, Article 30 of the Criminal Code, inclusive, to each agency that submits an application for recognition of eligibility for benefits. The point of illegal receipt of unemployment benefits

1) The portion of illegal receipt of unemployment benefits in each name of Q, S, U, Y, and AA

Articles 116(2) and 30 of the Employment Insurance Act, inclusive, for each unemployment benefits contractor

2) The portion on illegal receipt of each unemployment benefits in W’s name

Articles 116(2) and 30 of the former Employment Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 11274, Feb. 1, 2012) comprehensively cover each agency submitting an application for recognition of eligibility for each benefit.

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (each crime of fraud and each crime of violation of Employment Insurance Act shall be subject to punishment provided for each crime of more severe fraud)

1. Selection of punishment;

Determination of imprisonment for each crime of fraud

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (Aggravation of Concurrent Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) of the Criminal Act and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 (Aggravation of Concurrent Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) of the Criminal Act for Victims E with the largest penalty)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following circumstances considered favorable to the reasons for sentencing):

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following consideration shall be made again for the favorable circumstances described in the reasons for sentencing):

Reasons for sentencing

1. The scope of punishment by sentence: Imprisonment for not less than one year and six months but not more than two years and not more than six months;

2. Consideration of the sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria are applied to each of the crimes of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) in the holding between one and half years, and three and half years, while no separate sentencing criteria are provided for each of the crimes of violation of the Employment Insurance Act in the holding, each of the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes may not be applied as it is in the case of crime of violation of the Employment Insurance Act and commercial concurrent relation. As such, the sentencing criteria cannot be applied as it is for the case of mixing with the crime of which the sentencing guidelines are applied, the crime of which the sentencing guidelines are not established, and the crime of which the sentencing guidelines are not applied as they are subsequent to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) in the holding that the sentencing guidelines are applied as reference materials for proper sentencing, and the scope of the sentencing guidelines

(a) A violation of the Special Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement);

[Determination of Punishment] Type 3 (not less than 500 million won but less than 5 billion won) of Embezzlement and Breach of Trust

[Special Aggravationd ] Aggravationd : None of the factors to be mitigated: 1 substantially one company or family company

[Recommendation Areas and Penalties] Reduction Areas, one year and six months to three years;

B. Fraud

[Determination of Punishment] General Fraud (less than 100 million won)

[Special Aggravationd ] Aggravationd : None, and substantial damage has been recovered.

[Recommendation Area and Penalty] Reduction Area, one month to one year. The maximum of the sentence range of the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement), which is the basic crime for dealing with multiple crimes, is added to 1/2 of the maximum of the sentence range of the crime of fraud

3. Determination of sentence: Two years of imprisonment and three years of a stay of execution; and

In the case of the crime of occupational embezzlement of this case against the defendant, the defendant has continuously withdrawn and repeatedly used the funds of two companies that he operated for three years, and the amount of damage reaches 2.3777 million won in total, and in the case of the crime of violation of the Fraud and Employment Insurance Act, the crime of violation of the Employment Insurance Act is not good, such as unlawful supply and demand and fraud of the total amount of unemployment benefits prepared for the stabilization of workers' livelihood and the promotion of job-seeking activities through the method of confirming the total amount of six false service and retirement, and the defendant has not completed the recovery of damage caused by the embezzlement of this case until now.

On the other hand, E and F, the victim of embezzlement crime, are one of the actual defendants, and not only the victim company, other creditors or shareholders do not expressly express their intent to punish the defendant, and the defendant has been using a detailed company where the execution of funds or accounting has not been strictly performed so far without distinguishing the company funds and personal funds from that of this case. It seems only to have been caused to commit the crime of this case, and it does not seem to have been planned systematically and systematically, and it does not seem to have been difficult for the defendant to raise funds temporarily, so it does not take measures to recover the amount of embezzlement damage. However, it is difficult for the defendant to recover the amount of money borrowed from the loan or the outstanding amount, but it is reasonable to avoid the possibility that the defendant will meet the insolvency of the victim company through the collection of the borrowed money and the outstanding amount of money, and since the completion of the return procedure, damage or losses caused by the violation of the Employment Insurance Act due to the crime has already been cured or has been caused by the defendant's external motive, which is more favorable to the victim's business.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

The assistant judge of the presiding judge;

Judges Yang Young-young

Judges Park Jae-min

A person shall be appointed.