Perpetrator or Victim? Or...? ~ Interview Stories of Dummy Account Case Defendants, Part 2

Fraud Syndicates and Victims in the News

When watching television news report on the vicious acts of fraud syndicates—describing how the masterminds are cunning and deceitful, how the organizations divide their labor, and how the victims are duped—what are everyone's thoughts? Perhaps you might think along these lines: ordinary citizens have to brave the elements and bear heavy pressures just to earn a living; whereas the members of fraud syndicates are able-bodied and healthy yet refuse to do honest work, making a single phone call to steal people's hard-earned money and even drain their entire lifetime savings. In an instant, you feel both furious at the wickedness of the fraud syndicate and sympathetic toward the ignorance and pity of the victims.

The Third Person Hidden Behind the News: The Dummy Account Provider

Here, you might not have noticed that a third type of person is also hidden in these reports: this is someone who, facing various difficulties in life and trying to earn a living, had their account deceived by a fraud syndicate. The fraud syndicate then used their account as a dummy account, tricking others into wiring money into it before withdrawing it all. How do you view such a person? As an accomplice to the fraud syndicate? Or as a victim? Before rushing to a conclusion, let us look at the story of Ch'en Chin-k'un (a pseudonym)...

The Survival Story of A-K'un, a Dummy Account Provider

Lacking fancy educational credentials, A-K'un had always been able to make a living only through diligent and painstaking physical labor. However, not only was his pay low, but his work was also unstable. Besides supporting himself, he also had to raise a daughter still in school and elderly parents. A-K'un left early and returned late every day, yet the wages he collected left practically nothing after paying tuition fees and basic expenses. Facing heavy life pressures, A-K'un unwittingly developed depression.

To improve his difficult circumstances and let his family live a good life, A-K'un constantly kept an eye on job openings in the newspapers. However, because of his limited education, he hit walls everywhere he applied for jobs. Depressed, he saw a newspaper ad recruiting drivers with no conditions attached and immediately called to inquire, not expecting that this job posting would make his future life even worse.

In fact, this driver recruitment is a consistent tactic used by fraud syndicates to obtain dummy accounts. The fraud syndicate told A-K'un that as long as he drove hostesses to clubs, the front desk personnel would wire the hostess's remuneration for that trip and his salary into his account. The fraud syndicate also instructed A-K'un to meet in front of the Taichung Railway Station for an interview, reminding him to bring his ATM card along to verify whether the account was usable. Furthermore, the fraud syndicate told A-K'un not to tell anyone else about this, since special industries are not tolerated by the law. Eager to find a job, A-K'un felt something was a bit off, but compelled by life's predicament and figuring that his account only had a few dozen NT dollars left, even if he were scammed it wouldn't constitute much of a loss, he handed the ATM card and password to the other party for "testing" in order to secure this job. Of course, the fraud syndicate did not do any testing; they quickly used the account as a dummy account, tricking other victims into wiring money and then withdrawing it all. And because of this, A-K'un became an accessory to fraud!

When the police notified A-K'un to appear, he was already listed as a defendant. During police questioning, they completely ignored A-K'un's explanation, simply emphasizing blindly that A-K'un had definitely committed a crime and continuously advising him to plead guilty as soon as possible. When transferred to the prosecutors office, the prosecutor also constantly used an impatient tone, telling A-K'un to plead guilty. In the end, without actively seeking other evidence, the prosecutor indicted A-K'un on charges of aiding and abetting fraud merely on the grounds that another fraud victim had wired money into A-K'un's account and had it completely withdrawn.

Having been indicted, A-K'un had no choice but to tell his story to the court. What comforted A-K'un was that the judge in the first instance told A-K'un that he actually believed A-K'un was innocent, sympathized deeply with A-K'un's situation, and wanted to acquit him. However, the judge said that if he issued an acquittal, the prosecutor would definitely appeal again, and he would still be found guilty by the higher court at that time. In the end, A-K'un was sentenced to 2 months' imprisonment, commutable to a fine.

The Dummy Account Provider: Perpetrator or Victim? Or...?

Viewing A-K'un's story from a third-party perspective, some might criticize him for giving in to greed and that he should never have associated with a special industry; others might lament how he could be so ignorant as to hand over his account just like that. But does having greed, or being ignorant, equal constituting an accessory to fraud? When the judicial system fails to catch the members of fraud syndicates and instead penalizes individuals trapped in life difficulties who suffered a temporary lapse of judgment under criminal law, is this truly fair justice?