Open Decision Ledger · Economic crime
Calculation of the Amount Obtained by Fraud under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes and Requirements for Treating a Large Retailer as the Victim, in a Case Involving the Supply of Gulbi Made from Chinese-Origin Croaker
Translated from the Korean original. Read the Korean
Supreme Court, June 30, 2022, 2022Do3771 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 농수산물의원산지표시에관한법률위반·특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)(피고인1에대한예비적죄명:사기)·사기
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where gulbi whose origin was falsified is supplied to a large retailer in the form of a special commission purchase transaction, may that retailer be regarded as the victim of fraud and the entire supply price be taken as the amount obtained by fraud, so that the conduct may be punished as fraud in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes?
Holding
The amount obtained by fraud must be calculated strictly and carefully, and if it cannot be calculated concretely, the conduct cannot be punished as fraud in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes. In addition, for the retailer to become a victim, it must be proved that the substance of the transaction was a special commission purchase transaction and not a store lease, and that the retailer acquired and held ownership of the gulbi in substance. The Supreme Court held in this case that neither point was sufficiently proved.
Points at issue, verbatim
사기로 편취한 재물 또는 재산상의 이익의 가액을 구체적으로 산정할 수 없는 경우, 특정경제범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률 위반(사기)죄로 처벌할 수 있는지 여부(소극)
Unofficial English translation
where the value of the property or pecuniary advantage obtained by fraud cannot be specifically calculated, whether one may be punished for the offense of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (fraud) (negative)
Disposition
Partly reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결 중 피고인 1에 대한 유죄 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The guilty portion of the judgment of the court below as to Defendant 1 is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
사기 범행의 피해자임이 인정되기 위한 요건
Unofficial English translation
requirements for being recognized as a victim of the fraudulent act
Factors
- 사기로 편취한 재물 또는 재산상의 이익의 가액을 구체적으로 산정할 수 없는 경우
- 기망행위의 상대방 겸 그로 인한 착오 및 처분행위의 주체로서
- 특약매입거래의 성격과 형사처벌의 전제가 되는 재산범죄의 특성
- 그로 인한 금원 편취를 구성요건요소로 하는 사기죄 성립에 있어 고려하여야 할 사항
Unofficial English translation
• Where the value of the property or pecuniary advantage obtained by fraud cannot be specifically calculated
• being the counterparty to the act of deception as well as the subject of the resulting mistake and disposition
• the nature of the special purchase transaction and the characteristics of property offenses that form the premise of criminal punishment
• matters to be considered in establishing the offense of fraud, which has as its constituent elements the obtaining of money thereby
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2012. 8. 30. 선고 2012도5220 판결
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2012Do5220 decided August 30, 2012
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 2007. 4. 19. 선고 2005도7288 전원합의체 판결(공2007하, 923), 대법원 2012. 8. 30. 선고 2012도5220 판결
Burden of proof
The prosecution Read from the decision
합리적 의심을 배제할 수 있을 정도로 증명이 이루어졌다고 단정하기 어렵다
Unofficial English translation
it is difficult to conclude that proof has been established to the extent that reasonable doubt may be excluded
Open question and revisit condition
If the consumer is regarded as the substantial victim of the gulbi received and sold under false origin labeling, how should the amount obtained by fraud and the number of offenses as to the consumer be determined?
If the provisions of the Act on Fair Transactions in Large Retail Business that determine the legal nature of a special commission purchase transaction, or the review guidelines of the Korea Fair Trade Commission, change, or if on remand the court below identifies the victim and the amount obtained by fraud differently, this reading will be reexamined.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
5 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-16
When compared with an independent reading by another AI (GPT-6 Astra), which read only the original text without seeing the initial reading, 5 of the 8 axes matched, and the readings diverged on Axis 4 (Form of the test), Axis 7 (Burden of proof), and Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition).
Axis 4 (Form of the test): Primary “Elements stated” vs Independent “Circumstances weighed”
Since the Holdings present both the requirements for recognizing a victim and matters to be considered in light of the nature of the transaction and the like, one may place the focus on Elements stated and on Circumstances weighed, respectively.
특약매입거래의 성격과 형사처벌의 전제가 되는 재산범죄의 특성Axis 7 (Burden of proof): Primary “The prosecution” vs Independent “Not addressed”
One may read the prosecution's burden of proof from the Holdings concerning the requirements for the establishment of the crime and the issue of calculating the amount obtained by fraud, but since the party bearing the burden is not made explicit in the provided original text, it may also be read as Not addressed.
합리적 의심을 배제할 수 있을 정도로 증명이 이루어졌다고 단정하기 어렵다Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “If the consumer is regarded as the substantial victim of the gulbi received and sold under false origin labeling, how should the amount obtained by fraud and the number of offenses as to the consumer be determined?” vs Independent “On further deliberations, can the substantial victim status of each retailer and the amount obtained by fraud from each victim be established?”
The initial reading raises the question of the amount obtained by fraud and the determination of the number of offenses in fraud against consumers, while the independent reading asks whether the retailer's victim status and the amount obtained by fraud can be established on further deliberations.
사기로 편취한 재물 또는 재산상의 이익의 가액을 구체적으로 산정할 수 없는 경우, 특정경제범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률 위반(사기)죄로 처벌할 수 있는지 여부(소극)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 (Seoul High Court Decision 2020No214) held that the gulbi supply contract was concluded as a special commission purchase transaction and that ownership of the gulbi passed from the supplier through the retailer to the consumer, and found that, by falsely representing that all the gulbi supplied were Yeonggwang gulbi, the entire supply price, exclusive of commissions, was obtained by fraud. Although objective evidence to determine the proportion, quantity, and timing of the supply of gulbi processed from Chinese-origin croaker was unclear, the court below found the defendants guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes as to each victim, relying on the speculative statements of co-offenders.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that the constituent element that the gain obtained from each victim exceeded 5 billion won was not proved by abstract statements alone to the effect that the Chinese-origin proportion was approximately 20 to 30 percent or around 60 percent. Furthermore, since there was no ordering, inspection, or acceptance of goods, and whether credit purchases were recorded and tax invoices were issued was also unclear, leaving open the possibility that the substance of the transaction was a store lease, the Supreme Court held that the court below's finding that the retailer was the party deceived and the victim involved a misapprehension of legal principles and a failure to exhaust deliberations, and reversed in its entirety the portion of the judgment finding Defendant 1 guilty. The Supreme Court affirmed the court below's rulings on the portion concerning the violation of the Country of Origin Labeling Act and on Defendant 2's final appeal.
Distinguishing conditions
- A direct purchase or special commission purchase transaction where the record clearly shows that the retailer actually placed orders, inspected and accepted the goods, and handled the purchases on credit and issued tax invoices
- A case where objective evidence proves that all goods supplied were falsely labeled, so that the amount obtained by fraud from each victim can be calculated concretely
- A case litigated solely as to simple fraud under the Criminal Act, where the aggravated constituent element based on the amount gained is not at issue
Record verification notes
Before asserting the same conclusion, check whether there is evidence that throughout the period of the offense the substance of the contract was a purchase transaction and the retailer ultimately acquired ownership of the goods, and objective evidence specifying the proportion of falsely labeled goods by victim and by period.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 사기로 인한 특정경제범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률 위반죄를 적용함에 있어 유의하여야 할 사항 / 사기로 편취한 재물 또는 재산상의 이익의 가액을 구체적으로 산정할 수 없는 경우, 특정경제범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률 위반(사기)죄로 처벌할 수 있는지 여부(소극) [2] 대규모유통업체가 기망행위의 상대방 겸 그로 인한 착오 및 처분행위의 주체로서 사기 범행의 피해자임이 인정되기 위한 요건 / 특약매입거래의 성격과 형사처벌의 전제가 되는 재산범죄의 특성 등에 비추어 매입·판매된 상품의 하자에 따르는 기망 및 착오와 그로 인한 금원 편취를 구성요건요소로 하는 사기죄 성립에 있어 고려하여야 할 사항
Unofficial English translation
[1] Matters requiring caution in applying the offense of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (fraud) / whether, where the value of the property or pecuniary advantage obtained by fraud cannot be specifically calculated, one may be punished for the offense of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (fraud) (negative) [2] Requirements for recognizing a large-scale distributor as a victim of the fraudulent act, being the counterparty to the act of deception as well as the subject of the resulting mistake and disposition / matters to be considered in establishing the offense of fraud, which has as its constituent elements the deception and mistake arising from defects in the goods purchased and sold and the obtaining of money thereby, in light of the nature of the special purchase transaction and the characteristics of property offenses that form the premise of criminal punishment
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
원심판결 중 피고인 1에 대한 유죄 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다. 피고인 2의 상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The guilty portion of the judgment of the court below as to Defendant 1 is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. The final appeal of Defendant 2 is dismissed.
Provisions referred to
[1] 특정경제범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률 제3조 제1항, 형법 제347조 [2] 구 대규모유통업에서의 거래 공정화에 관한 법률(2018. 10. 16. 법률 제15854호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제2조 제3호, 제4호, 제5호, 제6호, 부칙(2011. 11. 14.) 제1조, 제2조, 형법 제347조
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