Caselaw

Criminal Case (Tel Aviv) 40013/05 State of Israel v. Uri Resch - part 211

September 13, 2011
Print

Similarly, in the fourth account, the real cost is 10,064,602 Spanish pesetas, while in the false supplier account of PLANAS, the  sum is 3,102,022 Spanish pesetas.

In the fifth shipment, this is a cost of 11,500,180 Spanish pesetas, with  the amount of  3,472,960 Spanish pesetas appearing in the PLANAS supplier account.

In the last shipment, the supplier's account of Opsea states that the cost is 11,745,946 Spanish pesetas, while in the supplier's account of PLANAS, in which the name of the importer Danidov Ltd. appears, the cost is 3,645,990 Spanish pesetas.

I have already determined that the false invoices on behalf of PLANAS were prepared by defendant 1, after he printed a considerable amount of empty supplier accounts, bearing the logo of PLANAS.  Needless to say, this is intended, first and foremost, to bring about a significant reduction in the required import taxes for goods sent to Israel.

According to the version of Defendant 5, Roberto Wagman, he was informed by Piccolo Line Ltd., and in fact by Defendant 6, Yigal Fadlon, that it was unable to continue importing Opsa products, due to a surplus of this company's product inventory.

Therefore, and in order not to lose the franchise in his possession as the exclusive importer of Opsa products, he handed over the import rights to OPCI, which was represented by Uri Resch.

According to this version, when defendant 6, Yigal Fadlon, who is the owner of Piccolo-Line Ltd., learned that another party was importing Opsa products, he rushed to purchase the imported products, due to his concern that there was a parallel import, which could lead to a price war.

The prosecution claims that this is a false version, since the goods that are the subject of the eighth indictment were ordered from Opsa, in accordance with quantities and agreements with Piccolo-Line, when OPCI, as well as the companies of Sevilla, Danidov and PLANAS, had no connection to the orders.

The import invoices were submitted on behalf of Danidov Ltd., with supplier accounts attached to them on behalf of PLANAS, which was presented as the supplier of the goods.  Needless to say, even according to the version, according  to which the order was placed by OPCI, there is no doubt that the importer is not Danidov, and there is no dispute that the supplier is not PLANAS.

Previous part1...210211
212...320Next part