Court File and Parties

CITATION: R. v. Kim, 2008 ONCA 458

DATE: 20080610

DOCKET: C46583

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

DOHERTY, JURIANSZ JJ.A. and KENT J. (ad hoc)

BETWEEN:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent

and

INSUP KIM and RICHARD KIM Appellants

Counsel: Leo Adler for the appellants Peter Scrutton for the respondent

Heard: June 9, 2008

On appeal from the convictions entered by Justice T. Lipson of the Ontario Court of Justice dated November 9, 2006 and the sentences imposed on January 26, 2007.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] It was open to the trial judge to find that the “Lee” vehicle and the “Kim” vehicle were one and the same vehicle. His reasons do not reveal any misapprehension of the evidence. The finding that the vehicles were in fact one and the same made the convictions virtually inevitable on the totality of the evidence.

[2] The verdicts reveal no inconsistency. If anything, the verdicts suggest that the trial judge failed to consider party liability. If so, that failure enured to the benefit of the appellants.

[3] The misrepresentations in the insurance documents fully justified the trial judge’s conclusion on the fraud count.

[4] The restitution order was open to the trial judge in the exercise of his discretion. We would not interfere.

[5] The appeal is dismissed.