Open Decision Ledger · Economic crime
Elements for Treating Repeated Acts of Fraud as a Single Comprehensive Offense, and the Test for Unity and Continuity of Criminal Intent
Translated from the Korean original. Read the Korean
Supreme Court, Oct. 27, 2016, 2016Do11318 (judgment)
Case name: 특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
To treat repeated acts of fraud committed against the same victim over a certain period as a single comprehensive offense, how must the unity and continuity of criminal intent be assessed?
Holding
Where acts of the same kind are repeated against the same victim under a single and continuing intent, they may constitute a single comprehensive offense. The Supreme Court has held, however, that because this bears a serious impact on the application of special Acts, sentencing, the statute of limitations, and res judicata, the method and manner of the acts, the motive, the intervals of time, and whether the intent was interrupted or renewed must be examined closely and the matter decided with caution.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
사기죄 등 재산범죄에서 동일한 피해자에 대하여 단일하고 계속된 범의하에 동종의 범행을 일정기간 반복하여 행한 경우에는 각 범행은 통틀어 포괄일죄가 될 수 있다.
Unofficial English translation
Where, in cases of the offense of fraud and other property offenses, an offender has committed offenses of the same kind against the same victim repeatedly over a certain period of time under a single and continuous criminal intent, each of the offenses may, taken together, constitute a single comprehensive offense.
Disposition
Reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
Form of the test
Circumstances weighed Stated in the decision
범의의 단절이나 갱신이 있었다고 볼 만한 사정이 있는지 등을 세밀하게 살펴 논리와 경험칙에 근거하여 합리적으로 판단하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
Whether there are circumstances from which it can be regarded that the criminal intent was severed or renewed, and the like, must be examined in detail and reasonably determined on the basis of logic and experience.
Factors
- 개별 범행의 방법과 태양
- 범행의 동기
- 각 범행 사이의 시간적 간격
- 동일한 기회 내지 관계를 이용하는 상황이 지속되는 가운데 후속 범행이 있었는지
- 범의의 단절이나 갱신이 있었다고 볼 만한 사정이 있는지
Unofficial English translation
• The method and manner of each individual offense
• The motive for the offenses
• The intervals of time between the respective offenses
• Whether the subsequent offense was committed while the situation of taking advantage of the same opportunity or relationship continued
• Whether there are circumstances from which it can be regarded that the criminal intent was severed or renewed
Relation to precedent
Cannot be determined Not in the decision
Decisions referred to
None listed
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
To what extent must the interval between acts reach before it may be regarded that the intent was interrupted or renewed?
We will revisit this reading if the monetary threshold under Article 3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes is amended, or if the Supreme Court sets out a different test for intent in single comprehensive offenses.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
8 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-16
In comparison with an independent reading by another AI lineage (GPT-6 Astra), which read only the original text without seeing the first reading, all eight axes matched.
Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The court below left intact the first-instance judgment, which had treated in their entirety the facts alleged in the indictment—that the defendant, in the name of Hanwha Securities fund investment, received 491,210,000 won on 7 occasions from around August 11, 2008 to around June 22, 2012, and that, in the name of Tongyang Securities fund investment, he received 400,000,000 won on 6 occasions from around December 28, 2011 to around June 10, 2013—as a single comprehensive offense and found a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (fraud) established.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found that the oneness and continuity of intent cannot readily be concluded, pointing out that the intervals between the acts reach approximately 1 year, approximately 2 years and 7 months, and approximately 1 year and 4 months; that some of the acts began upon the victim's first making contact, so that the circumstances of their commission differ; and that the recommendation of the Tongyang Securities fund also came after an interval of approximately 1 year and 1 month from the immediately preceding act. Since some of the respective offenses stand in a relation of substantive concurrence, where the amount of gain from each does not reach 500 million won there remains room for only the offense of fraud under the Criminal Act to be established; the court below therefore committed a misapprehension of legal principles and a failure to exhaust deliberations by finding all of the acts to constitute a single comprehensive offense without sufficient examination.
Distinguishing conditions
- Cases in which the intervals between the acts are short and the same means of deception continued without interruption
- Cases in which the victims differ from one another or the acts are not of the same kind
- Cases in which the amount of gain from each act already exceeds the aggravated punishment threshold of the special Act, so that whether the acts form a single comprehensive offense has no effect on the statutory provision to be applied
Record verification notes
Before asserting a single comprehensive offense, one should examine the gaps between the acts, who first made the investment proposal, and whether any new occasion for deception (a new fund product or external contact) arose, thereby looking into whether there are circumstances to be regarded as an interruption or renewal of intent.
From the official text
Points at issue
사기죄 등 재산범죄에서 일정기간 반복하여 행하여진 각 범행이 포괄일죄로 되기 위한 요건 및 포괄일죄가 되는지 판단할 때 고려하여야 할 사항 / 범의의 단일성과 계속성을 판단하는 기준
Unofficial English translation
Requirements for each of a series of offenses committed repeatedly over a certain period of time to constitute a single comprehensive offense in cases of the offense of fraud and other property offenses, and matters to be considered when determining whether they constitute a single comprehensive offense / Criteria for determining the unity and continuity of criminal intent
Summary of the holding
사기죄 등 재산범죄에서 동일한 피해자에 대하여 단일하고 계속된 범의하에 동종의 범행을 일정기간 반복하여 행한 경우에는 각 범행은 통틀어 포괄일죄가 될 수 있다. 다만 각 범행이 포괄일죄가 되느냐 경합범이 되느냐는 그에 따라 피해액을 기준으로 가중처벌을 하도록 하는 특별법이 적용되는지 등이 달라질 뿐 아니라 양형 판단 및 공소시효와 기판력에 이르기까지 피고인에게 중대한 영향을 미치게 되므로 매우 신중하게 판단하여야 한다. 특히 범의의 단일성과 계속성은 개별 범행의 방법과 태양, 범행의 동기, 각 범행 사이의 시간적 간격, 그리고 동일한 기회 내지 관계를 이용하는 상황이 지속되는 가운데 후속 범행이 있었는지, 즉 범의의 단절이나 갱신이 있었다고 볼 만한 사정이 있는지 등을 세밀하게 살펴 논리와 경험칙에 근거하여 합리적으로 판단하여야 한다.
Order
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
Provisions referred to
형법 제37조, 제347조, 특정경제범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률 제3조
Read 2026-10-16 · Cross-read 2026-10-16. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger