beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2018.10.02 2018고단1856

전자금융거래법위반

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No person shall lend or receive a cash card, a password necessary for using the cash card, and a cash card issued by a financial institution, or a passbook, etc. when demanding, demanding, or promising to provide, demand, or promise the price therefor.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, through his cell phone around March 2018, called “to pay KRW 300,000,000 to one month when he borrowed an account necessary for the operation of the sports soil site” from a person without his name. In response, the Defendant got a personal account in the name of the Defendant.

On March 26, 2018, the Defendant sent the physical card number to non-party to the name card via the phone line, connected to the bank account B (C) in the name of the Defendant, and notified the password of the said physical card by telephone.

As a result, the Defendant promised to pay the price to the name in return for lending electronic financial transaction access media to the name in question.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the accused;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on a copy of passbook;

1. Article 49 of the Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense, Article 49 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions through which punishment is selected, and Article 6 (3) 2 of the same Act, and Article 6 (3) 2 of the same Act, and selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Strict punishment is required for acts such as lending media access to the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which can be abused as means of other crimes, such as telephone finance fraud and tax evasion.

The defendant knew that the lending of the access media was illegal, and the crime of fraud was actually committed in relation to the access media that the defendant lent.

However, the circumstances are that the defendant recognizes his mistake and reflects it, there is no significant penalty history exceeding the same kind of punishment or fine, and that there is no profit actually acquired by the defendant, etc.