Caselaw

Criminal Case (Tel Aviv) 40013/05 State of Israel v. Uri Resch - part 20

September 13, 2011
Print

This is done by forging the sales accounts and presenting false sales accounts and listings, according to which the prices are low, up to a third of the real cost of the goods.

In the introduction to Charges 1 and 2, it was claimed that Schloss International Trade Ltd. (hereinafter: "Schloss") is a corporation whose registered shareholders are Ms. Ramonda Fischer and Naturafil Medic Center Ltd.  However, in fact, Schloss is controlled by defendant 1 and Elhanan Tenenbaum, while the shareholders are straw men.

In order to realize the fraudulent scheme, Defendant 1 approached Mr. Aharon Calderon, the owner of Lantex Trade (1992), in a tax appeal (hereinafter: "Lantex") and asked to use Lantex's credit volume at Bank Leumi, in order to open letters of credit for the benefit of suppliers of goods from abroad.  This is in exchange for a fee at a certain rate of the volume of the letters of credit.

The prosecution claims that defendant 1 promised Calderón that the bank would not honor the letters of credit that would be opened at his request and that there was no concern that his bank account would be charged for the amounts stated in the letters of credit, but only for fees.  Calderon agreed to the offer and instructed Bank Leumi to receive instructions, directly from Defendant 1, and to charge the Lantex account at this bank, for various charges due to the opening of the letters of credit.

The prosecution further claims that the letters of credit were drafted by defendant 1 by way of fraud and deception, with the intention of failing the suppliers of the goods and bringing them into error, with the aim of taking advantage of the suppliers' mistake and making use of the bill of lading, in order to receive the goods without paying for them.  When the bills of lading were received by defendant 1, he acted to release the goods and sell them, despite the fact that the bank announced that it would not honor the letters of credit due to reservations.  At the same time, defendant 1 informed the bank of his refusal to remove the reservations and receive the documents, and instructed the bank to return the documents to the notifying bank and to the supplier of the goods.

Previous part1...1920
21...320Next part