[증권거래법위반][공1993.11.1.(955),2833]
Article 107 (1) of the former Securities and Exchange Act (amended by Act No. 4469 of Dec. 31, 1991)
In light of the purport of Article 107 (1) of the former Securities and Exchange Act (amended by Act No. 4469 of Dec. 31, 1991) which is punished under subparagraph 3 of Article 208 of the same Act, a violation of Article 107 (1) of the same Act refers to an act of arbitrarily trading on the customer's account without the customer's decision on the type, item, and trading classification and method of securities, and does not include an act of a securities company under a discretionary trading on the customer's own account, as well as the quantity, price, type, item, and period of trading as well as the type, item, and trading classification and method of securities, even though the securities company is authorized only on the basis of the customer's entrustment of trading.
Articles 107(1) and 208 subparag. 3 of the former Securities and Exchange Act (amended by Act No. 4469 of Dec. 31, 191)
Supreme Court Decision 93Do691 delivered on September 10, 1993
No. 13
Prosecutor
Seoul Criminal Court Decision 92No5238 delivered on November 24, 1992
The appeal is dismissed.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
Article 107 (1) of the former Securities and Exchange Act (amended by Act No. 4469 of Dec. 31, 1991) provides that when a member is entrusted to sell and purchase securities by a customer, he/she may carry out such sale and purchase transaction under the authority of the customer only on the quantity, price and time of sale and purchase. In such cases, the type, item, classification and method of sale and purchase of securities must be decided by the customer. Thus, a violation of Article 107 (1) of the former Securities and Exchange Act, which is punished pursuant to Article 208 subparagraph 3 of the same Act, provides that a securities company, which is a member of the Korea Stock Exchange, shall, in light of the purport of recognizing only a limited discretionary sale and purchase transaction, include not only the quantity, price, and time of sale and purchase of securities on its account, but also the type, quantity, price and time of sale and purchase of securities, the act of trading under the authority of the customer, regardless of classification and method of sale and purchase and sale of securities, is not included in the type and method of sale and sale.
In addition, the customer's contract to establish a transaction agreement with a securities company is merely a basic contract to be applied to a continuous transaction relationship between the customer and the securities company, and it is not immediately entrusted or entrusted with the transaction, and it is only entrusted or entrusted with the transaction, unless there are special circumstances.
In the same purport, the court below is just in maintaining the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted the defendant on the ground that the non-indicted A, an employee of the defendant, was not entrusted with, or entrusted with, the securities transaction of this case from the non-indicted B, and there is no illegality in the misapprehension of the legal principles like the theory
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)