[사기미수·컴퓨터등사용사기][공2006.10.15.(260),1775]
Where an employee of a financial institution has deposited money into a certain account designated by another accomplice by means of inputting false information as if the money was deposited into such account, the time when the crime of fraud by use, such as computer, was committed.
In a case where an employee of a financial institution made the said account deposited in a specific account designated by other accomplices using a computer terminal by entering false information as if money was deposited in the said account, the employee acquired the pecuniary benefits that can be withdrawn from the account in the future by completing such deposit procedure, and thus, the crime of fraud by use, such as computer, etc., under Article 347-2 of the Criminal Act was committed only once the deposit was revoked, and even if such deposit was not actually withdrawn, it cannot be said that there was any impact on the crime of fraud by use, such as computer, etc. already established.
Articles 25(1) and 347-2 of the Criminal Act
Defendant
Defendant
Law Firm Law Firm, Attorney Park Jong-chul, Counsel for defendant-appellant
Seoul Central District Court Decision 2005No3699, 2006No623 decided June 2, 2006
The appeal is dismissed.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
1. At least two co-offenders who are jointly engaged in a crime do not legally require a certain type of punishment, but only two or more persons commit a combination of intent to jointly process a crime and realize the crime. Even if there was no process of conspiracy, if a combination of intent is formed in order or impliedly through several persons, the conspiracy relationship is established, and even those who did not directly participate in the act of conspiracy are subject to criminal liability as co-principal for other persons' act (see Supreme Court Decisions 98Do30, Mar. 27, 1998; 2005Do8507, Jan. 26, 2006, etc.).
Examining the court below's decision and the first instance court's evidence admitted by the court below in light of the above legal principles and records, the court below is justified in finding the defendant guilty of all the criminal facts committed by fraud, including attempted fraud and computer, on the ground that the defendant's intent to commit each of the crimes of this case is recognized and the liability as an accomplice is recognized, considering the various circumstances as stated in its decision.
The court below did not err by misapprehending the rules of evidence or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the establishment of joint principal offenders without making a full deliberation as alleged in the grounds of appeal.
2. Article 347-2 of the Criminal Act provides that a person who acquires or causes a third party to acquire economic benefits by inputting a false information or improper order into an information processing device, or inputting or altering information without authority, shall be punished. If an employee of a financial institution allows another accomplice to deposit money into the above account by inputting false information as if the money was deposited into a specific account designated by another accomplice using an electronic computer device, the employee of the financial institution shall be deemed to have acquired economic benefits that can be withdrawn from the future account by completing such deposit procedure. Thus, the crime of fraud by using computers, etc., as provided in Article 347-2 of the Criminal Act shall be deemed to have been completed, and even if such deposit was revoked and could not be actually withdrawn, it does not affect the crime of fraud by using a computer, etc. already established.
The court below is justified in holding that the non-indicted 2's act of having completed deposit in a specific account using a computer device established in the above Nonghyup branch under the direction of other co-offenders, such as the defendant, etc. was punished as a result of the crime of fraud by using computers, etc. as provided in Article 347-2 of the Criminal Act.
The court below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the time when the crime of fraud by using computers, etc. was committed.
3. The argument that the court below’s punishment is too heavy cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for less than 10 years.
4. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Shin Hyun-chul (Presiding Justice)