그럼에도 피고인들은 하위 판매점을 통해 신용카드 가맹점 명의를 땡 처리업자 등에게 대 여하였다.

In addition, the Defendants acquired credit card sales claims even though they are not credit card companies.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

The sentence of the lower court against the illegal Defendants (Defendant A: 8 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence, 4 months of suspended sentence, 1 year of suspended sentence) is too unfortunate and unfair.

An ex officio judgment prosecutor requested changes in the indictment on the violation of the Act on Special Cases of Credit Financial Business due to the acquisition of credit by transfer of credit in transactions with a credit card in the first instance, as stated below. This court permitted changes in the indictment and changed the subject of the judgment.

On the other hand, the part related to the revised facts charged and the part of the judgment of the court below guilty shall be sentenced to a single sentence in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the part of the judgment below's conviction cannot be maintained as it is.

However, there are such reasons for ex officio reversal.

Even if the prosecutor's credit card merchant's credit card company's credit card company's credit card company's credit card company's credit card company's credit card company's credit card company's credit

Article 2 subparag. 5 of the former Act on the Financial Business Specializing in Credit (amended by Act No. 13068, Jan. 20, 2015; hereinafter “the Act”) on the part of the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of the facts (the violation of the Act on the Financial Business Specializing in Credit Card Merchants due to the lending of the name of credit card member stores) refers to “credit card holders and debit card holders according to a contract with the credit card company.”