전자금융거래법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
The summary of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor (unfair sentencing) is as follows: (a) the crime of this case was committed by the prosecutor, even though the defendant was aware that it was used for illegal purposes, transferred the medium of access to electronic financial transactions in return for consideration; and (b) the so-called "Spoot passbook", which is distributed through the crime of transferring access media, is used as an important means of various crimes, such as Bosing, so it is in need of strict punishment; and (c) the defendant was punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of violating the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (a group deadly weapons, etc.) at the Seoul Central District Court on May 3, 2013 and committed the crime of this case during the period of suspended execution after being sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years for a period of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a
Judgment
The Defendant was paid KRW 500,00 in return for the transfer of electronic financial transaction access media. This is not only prejudicial to the trust and safety of financial transactions, but also because the transferred access media can be used for various criminal acts, the nature of the crime is not good. The Defendant was actually used for the Defendant’s transfer access media, and the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on May 3, 2013 and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on May 11, 2013 due to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group deadly weapon, etc.) at the Seoul Central District Court on the grounds that the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on May 11, 2013 and committed the instant crime while the judgment became final and conclusive, and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc., and all of the conditions of the instant punishment revealed after the crime was committed, and thus, the above assertion of the lower court’s judgment is unreasonable.
In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.