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.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below is unreasonable as it is too unfasible to the extent that the punishment (3 million won in penalty) imposed by the court below is too unfased.
2. Even in light of the fact that the Defendant led to the instant crime and the primary offender, the act of lending the access media like the instant crime requires strict countermeasures as it provides means essential for other crimes, such as scams and illegal gambling, etc. ② The access media leased by the Defendant was actually used for the instant crime, and the Defendant offered the access media with a promise in return for a large amount of 3 million won per month, the Defendant also anticipated that the access media leased by the Defendant can be misused for other crimes, but it appears that the Defendant lent it. In light of the above, the lower court’s sentencing is somewhat weak.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided after pleading as follows.
[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Article 49 of the Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 49 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions through which punishment is selected (excluding punishment); Article 6 (3) 2 of the same Act (excluding punishment);
1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;
1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds of the sentencing of Article 334(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: equity of similar cases and punishment, Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, etc., and the various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case.