[ad_1]
The court sentenced to 3 years in prison without parole Former Director General of the Provincial Administration Department – Former Director General of the village head. Corruption cases, the sheriff’s examination of the year 52, the examination 103 people were imprisoned.
On September 29 in the Criminal Court, the case of corruption and misconduct in the middle of Soi Sikham, Nakhon Chaisri Road, the court read the verdict in the case. The prosecutor is the plaintiff who filed a lawsuit. Mr. Wongsak Sawat Panich Former Director General of the Provincial Administration Department 1st defendant, Mr. Samran Tanruangsri, former director, Kamnan, head of the 2nd defendant, Mr. Karnchit Switchsaeng, former Secretary of the Provincial Administration Department, the third defendant with 119 people (Defendant 4-119 is the entrance exam The Sheriff’s School has Mr. Kim Priprem, former personal secretary to the former Director General of the Provincial Administration Department as the 117th defendant).
Stay on top of the news Press to follow the live news line.
The prosecution stated that between February 16, 2009 and June 12, 2009 during the day, the first accused while he held the position of Director General of the Provincial Administration Department and the second accused while he held the position of Director of the Head of the Village. Local Administration Office, Provincial Administration Department, Ministry of the Interior Jointly perform or refrain from performing duties improperly and dishonestly With the third defendant the 119th defendant joined in support of the crime
That is, the first defendant and the second defendant together with Mr. Wuttichai Saowakomut, Director of the Department of Officials of the Provincial Administration who is in charge of organizing and managing the personnel, as well as selecting public officials to attend the course of sheriff At that time, planned and acted to assist the test candidates for the selection of public officials to attend the sheriff course for fiscal year 2009 according to the list of 150 names that the third defendant brought to pass the test of selection.
Which is in accordance with the order of the political authority at that time by the first defendant and Mr. Wuttichai What is the subjective examination selection committee, subjective examination selection Mr. Wuttichai’s Department of General Knowledge Is in charge of issuing an exam and select a subjective subject Section of knowledge and competence used only for the position in which the second defendant issued another exam It will be used in the selection test for officials who attend the training course in 2009 for the second defendant and Mr. Wuttichai will be in charge of examining the exam.
Later, when the selection test was completed, Mr. Wuttichai, witnessing the orders of the first defendant, took the subjective test to stay. According to his authority, Mr. Wuttichai, together with the third defendant, organized the list of 150 names as mentioned above. Be evaluated to obtain the rank and model that attend the training according to the needs of the political authority. Mr. Wuttichai has prepared a voting document for the Department of General Knowledge.
The court sentenced to 3 years in prison without parole Former Director General of the Provincial Administration Department – Former Director General of the village head.
In which Mr. Wuttichai is the person who certified the score as a qualifier. And prepare a document to vote for the department of knowledge and capacity of specific positions for the second defendant, who has been assigned to the subjective examination. Only for the position in which he is examined Verification of the examination and completion of the score obtained from the examination in said document, but the second defendant improperly endorsed it as proof that he was the examiner in the voting documents even though there was no performed the exam. actual As assigned either way
Then return it to Mr. Wuttichai It is used to fill out fake voting messages, helping test participants with a list of 150 people until they were recruited for the sheriff course for fiscal year 2009, Lot 68, 69 and 70, as specified by the 1st and 2nd defendants. He had planned together with Mr. Wuttichai which is a certification as evidence that he has done something false and certified as evidence that the document is intended to prove that the truth is false for the benefit of the test participants who have a list of 150 people to be selected. Attend the 2009 training course.
After the name of the person who passed the test was announced and the person passed the test, the 68th, 69th and 70th edition sheriff training course was Defendant No. 1 and Mr. Wuttichai. He jointly planned and concealed the crime by the 1st defendant ordered the defendant the 117th agent, the 119th defendant with the 76th defendant, the 69th representative and the 103rd defendant, the 70th representative to receive sample responses to the Subjective Knowledge Courses exam, from general knowledge and specific knowledge of multiple positions.
And the rest of Mr. Wuttichai’s test blank answer papers to bring class 68, 69 and 70 participants who are on the list who were assisted to pass the 150 names test. The answer was rewritten on a blank answer sheet, where the 117th defendant returned it to the 118th defendant and the fourth defendant to the 49th defendant, including himself, who was in the process of studying for the 68th sheriff’s course. The answers were written in the form of answers on the blank answer booklet, and the 119th defendant and the 76th defendant returned from the 50th to the 75th defendant and the 77th defendant to the 88th defendant, including the 119th defendant and the 76th defendant.
The one who at that time was in the process of studying the sheriff’s course, class 69, wrote the answer according to the sample Received on the blank answer paper, the defendant 103 was returned to the defendant 89 to the defendant 102 and the defendant 104 to the defendant 116 and Mr. Chuchep Mahachok, who has not yet filed a lawsuit. Including myself who at that time was in the process of studying the sheriff’s course, class 70, I wrote the answers according to the sample received on the paper. There was also no response.
The 117th defendant, 76th defendant, and 103rd defendant then compiled the new written response documents. To give Mr. Wuttichai, Mr. Wuttichai relying on the opportunity that he is the official responsible for Keeping the answer sheet document with knowledge of the 1st defendant’s order did falsify the answer sheet by removing the answer sheet original proof of answer book cover. Then use a new written answer sheet that you received from the 117th defendant, the 76th defendant, and the 103rd defendant to replace the original answer sheet.
This is for those who come to consult the answer book or those involved in examining the exam fraud. The answer book is believed to be the actual answer book produced by the 4th to 119th defendant and Mr. Chuchuep Mahachok, while the real evidence is the illegal counterfeiting of the answer book.
The actions of the first accused, the second accused and Mr. Wuttichai Saowakomut act as improper and corrupt. Including falsifying documents and conducting false tests, causing damage to the Provincial Administration Department and other people who entered the test but did not qualify for the sheriff’s training course for fiscal year 2009, as well as other persons involved by There were from the third to the 119th defendants and Mr. Chuep Mahachok, who was not the relevant competent official, was the advocate of the crime.
The incident occurred in the Ratchabophit Sub-District Provincial Administration Department, Phra Nakhon District and Bang Phlat District. Bangkok, Thanarat Camp, Khao Noi Sub-District, Pranburi District Prachuap Khiri Khan Province, Thanyaburi District Administrative College, Pathum Thani Province, Vajirawut Exploration Camp, Sriracha District, Chonburi Province
Request sanction under the Penal Code, articles 83, 86, 157, 161,162.
By the Social Welfare Court, the former director general of the Provincial Administration Department was sentenced to prison for the first defendant against the Penal Code (PO) 157 for being an official who fulfilled or abstained from performing functions improperly or dishonestly causing damage to Everyone, By. By. Section 161 base, is an official, has the duty to make documents or take care of the documents. Forgery of documents, By. Section 162 (1) (4) As an officer, you have the duty to make documents or complete. Text in the document, which has acted with false certification Punish under Section 157, which is the most severe sentence of imprisonment for 3 years without waiting for punishment
For the former director of the part of the town chief who is the state official dependent on the Provincial Administration Department, the second defendant is guilty of the Civil Code, Section 157,162 (1) (4), the punishment under Section 157, which is the most severe sentence, he is imprisoned for 3 years without being punished as well.
The former secretary of the department Who is a government official under the Provincial Administration Department, the third defendant errs according to Section 157,162 (1) (4), along with Section 86 as a promoter of crimes, receives a prison sentence of 2 years without waiting for child support punishment under Section 157, 86.
Class President and Class Secretary to help change the exam. Consisting of the defendants 48,76,103,117,119 Convicted to be a defender of the crime according to Section 157,162 (1) (4), together with Section 86, will be imprisoned for 2 years, without waiting for punishment. Support base under Section 157, 86 which is the heaviest chapter
And a group of examinees who do not accept that the test has been rewritten, a total of 103 people, including defendants 4-6,8-18, 20-39, 41-47, 49-72, 74-75, 78- 79, 81-. 102, 104, 106-116, 118 are guilty of supporting offenses under Section 157, 161 along with Section 86 to be punished as partisans of offenses under Section 157, along with 86, imprisonment for 2 years and fine each person. 12,000 baht in prison Awaiting punishment, fixed for 2 years
And sentenced to dismiss the defendants 7, 37, 40, 73, 77, 80, 105, who took the test, the proof of the crime could not yet be heard.
[ad_2]
