According to Articles 32(6) and 32(1) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies (hereinafter “Act”), and Article 5(29 of the Enforcement Decree of the Enforcement Decree of the Act, the Electronic Financial Transactions Act included in the facts charged in the instant case constitutes “Acts and subordinate statutes related to finance, as prescribed by Presidential Decree,” but it is reasonable to view that the provisions of Article 32(6) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies apply only to the case where the Defendant falls under the subject of examination of eligibility under Article 32(1) of the Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2017Do2120, Mar. 15, 2018). Accordingly, even according to the record, there is no evidence to view that the Defendant falls under the subject of examination of eligibility under Article 32(1) of the Act on the Establishment of Financial Control of Financial Companies, and thus, it is justifiable for the lower court to separately examine the Defendant’s charge of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, which is separate from the charges charged in the instant case.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on Article 32(6) of the Act on the Management of Financial Companies.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.