As for the condition of sending two sets of original documents to the bank and the forwarder – this is not intended to facilitate the theft of goods, but rather it is a standard requirement accepted in the commercial world. It was further argued that all the commercial terms of the documentary credit, including the type of goods, their quantity, delivery dates, etc., were determined according to the requirements of the client, Haim Buchris, as part of the agreement reached with the supplier. The requirement to specify the delivery dates and the number of shipments was made on the basis of purely commercial and business considerations.
Even on the dates of the presentation of the documents and the expiration of the letter of credit, the defense does not find any defect, since these are reasonable dates that are accepted in the world of international trade. Similar things were also said with regard to the condition that requires all the shipping documents to be sent at once – when according to the defense, this is a reasonable and acceptable condition and is not a misleading or misleading condition. The designation of the ports of departure and arrival was determined by Buchris himself, on the basis of business and commercial considerations.
The defense does not accept the prosecution's argument that defendant 1 implanted names in the letter of credit that include spelling errors and various typographical errors, in order to enable avoidance of payment for goods. In this context, it was argued that purely technical errors should not lead to the cancellation of the letter of credit, unless it is a matter of material disruption of the supplier's name or the name of the port, details that must be accurate and free of any errors.
In summary, the defense argues that all the terms appearing in the documentary credit were logical and stemmed from business, commercial and financial rationale, and not from fraudulent intent.
The testimony of Aharon Calderon, which prima facie indicates that defendant 1 promised him to insert reservations into the letters of credit, does not indicate any fraudulent intent. The defendant's intention was to protect Calderon, who was the financier of the transaction. Indeed, defendant 1 promised Calderon that he would create a defense mechanism for him, which would ensure that he would not be obligated to pay money to the supplier, without receiving his money from the client.