Convicted of aggravated fraud, imprisonment and grievous damages.
During her unemployment, her mother, who worked unpaid in her son’s accounting firm, has been sentenced to aggravated fraud and fraud to conditional imprisonment and extensive damages in the North Karelia District Court. The boy, for his part, received a four-month suspended prison sentence for aiding and abetting his mother’s fraud.
The mother had kept the accounts of one client in her son’s accounting firm for more than three years. He did not raise his salary for the work. The accounting firm, on the other hand, received tens of thousands of euros in fees from the mother’s client company.
The woman was unemployed at the same time. He received an unemployment allowance from the Unemployment Insurance Fund for Special Sectors of EUR 56,415. In addition, he received a loan guarantee of EUR 9,600 from the insurance company for unemployment time.
The District Court held that although the woman was not paid for her work, she was not unemployed as required by the Unemployment Security Act. According to the district court, the work in question is usually carried out by accounting firms in an employment relationship or as an entrepreneur.
In court, the woman admitted her unpaid work but denied the crime. The defense believes that doing work without pay is not a crime. Its woman in court admitted that she did not raise her salary precisely because it would not have affected her unemployment benefit.
The district court sentenced the woman to seven months’ probation for gross fraud for unemployment benefit and for fraud for insurance compensation.
The court held that the acts could have resulted in a longer sentence than imprisonment, but it reasoned the sentence because of the large damages.
By the court’s decision, the woman will have to repay the unemployment and insurance benefits she received, a total of 66,000 euros. He will also have to pay legal fees of EUR 3,512. The state charges the son EUR 1,900 for legal fees.
The verdict is not final. It can be appealed to the Eastern Finland Court of Appeal.
Source site www.is.fi