The Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct, Region 3, imprisoned 105 years for the former director of the Education Division of Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization. Use the royal car to play golf. Went back to the residence of the Provincial Administrative Organization President and Deputy Prime Minister. The person who approves is also affected.
From the case, the NACC has resolved to determine the cause of the offense. According to the allegation, Mr. Rungrak Lukbua, Director of the Education Division Religion and culture Under the jurisdiction of the Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization and others in the case of using government vehicles for personal use. On the round trip between home and work and taking government cars to play golf In this case, the Attorney General by the prosecutor The Office of the Special Prosecutor for the Suppression of Corruption Cases 1, Region 3 has been the plaintiff in filing a lawsuit against Mr. Rungrak Lukbua and others as defendants with the Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases, Region 3.
Most recently, Mr. Adul Wandee, Director of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), Yasothon Province. Revealing the progress that Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases The judgment was read and it was concluded that at the time of the incident, Mr. Rungrak Lukbua, the first defendant, held the position of Director of the Education Division. Religion and Culture (Level 8) Mr. Satiraphon Naksuk, the second defendant, holds the position of President of the Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization and Mr. Phongsiri Mueanchart, the third defendant, holds the position of Deputy President of the Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization. Acting and performing official duties on behalf of the President of the Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization.
“Circumstances from July 2014 to June 2015, Defendant No. 1 prepared an application for permission to use a central vehicle and presented it to Defendant No. 2, President of the Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization. And from July 2015 to March 2016, an application for permission to use a central vehicle was prepared and submitted to the third defendant, Deputy Mayor of the Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization. acting government official President of the Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization to request permission to bring a car The car with registration number Kor 7129 Yasothon went to park and keep it at his residence, house number 11, Village No. 3, Sai Mun Subdistrict, Sai Mun District, Yasothon Province and drove the said car as a vehicle for traveling back and forth. Between the residence and the Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization The car was never parked and stored at the Yasothon Provincial Administrative Organization. In addition, the said car was also used. Go play golf at the 16th Infantry Regiment golf course, Bodindecha Camp. The first defendant’s behavior therefore was the use of a car belonging to the Sothon Provincial Administrative Organization for his personal benefit illegally. For nearly 2 years, this is a serious action for the 2nd defendant and the 3rd defendant, who gave permission for the 1st defendant to use the government car but did not witness the 1st defendant using the car for personal use in any way. Therefore, it is not considered dishonest performance of duty or omission to perform duty. But not taking care of your duties It is considered a neglect of duty. cause damage But running the country cannot avoid risk. and all three defendants confessed.”
The Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases Region 3 has ruled that 1. Defendant No. 1, Mr. Rungrak Lukbua, is guilty under the Criminal Code, Section 151 (formerly) and the Organic Act on Prevention and Suppression of Corruption, B.E. 1999, Section 123/1, a total of 21 counts, punishable according to Section 151 (formerly) of the Criminal Code, which is the section with the most severe punishment, 5 years in prison for each count, for a total of 105 years in prison. The first defendant confessed. It is beneficial to consider. According to Section 78 of the Criminal Code, he would be imprisoned for 52 years and 6 months, but when all counts are combined, the first defendant’s imprisonment is not more than 50 years according to the Criminal Code, Section 91(3).
2. The second defendant, Mr. Satirapon Naksuk, and the third defendant, Mr. Phongsiri Mueanchart, are guilty under the Criminal Code, Section 157 (formerly) and the Organic Act on Prevention and Suppression of Corruption 1999, amended (No. 2). ) B.E. 2011, Section 123/1, punishable according to the Act on Prevention and Suppression of Corruption B.E. 2542, amended (No. 2) B.E. 2011, Section 123/1, which is the chapter that is punishable. The second defendant has 12 counts including 12 years in prison and a 240,000 baht fine, and the third defendant has 16 counts, 16 years in prison and a 320,000 baht fine. The second and third defendants have pleaded not guilty. It is beneficial to consider if there are any mitigating circumstances. Reduce to half It does not appear that the second defendant and the third defendant have ever been imprisoned before. and never used the said car It was agreed that the sentences should be suspended for 2 years and each person should report to the probation officer for 4 months at a time. throughout the period of probation and to perform social services or public benefits for 36 hours each and pay a fine
Mr. Adul said that this matter is considered a case study of important lessons for local administrators. Permanent government official Government agencies and state enterprises in Yasothon Province who must monitor the use of official vehicles by subordinates To be in accordance with regulations and laws and used only in government service, used for personal gain It is considered a conflict between personal interests and conflicts of interest may require legal action such as this case. which the supervisor must share responsibility for Therefore, I would like to warn you with concern that something like this will happen again. and to enhance transparency in operations without involving personal matters However, the case is not yet final. The defendant has the right to fight the case. to prove innocence in a higher court before the final judgment is rendered, indicating that the accused or defendant who has committed an offense cannot treat that person as if he or she had committed the crime.
2023-10-12 07:15:55
#Imprisoned #years #director #Education #Division #Yasothon #Provincial #Administrative #Organization #royal #vehicle #play #golf
;Resize=(1200,627)&impolicy=perceptual&quality=mediumHigh&hash=020f661d89d791a352b6a66f19db7910ad4e99516c859f0adc1634c200d4f19a "Nadal and Djokovic Show Respect in Response to Ambition Comparison")