beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.07.21 2016고정2253

금융실명거래및비밀보장에관한법률위반

Text

Defendants are not guilty.

Reasons

1. No person who has obtained or disclosed transaction information, etc. provided or disclosed by a person who has become aware of an order to submit facts constituting an offense or a person who has obtained a warrant issued by a court of facts constituting an offense shall provide or divulge such transaction information, etc. to another person;

Defendant

B is the representative director of the corporation E, the purpose of which is the water supply and sewerage facility construction business in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D building 1206, and the defendant A is the auditor of the corporation E.

The Defendants, as in E, filed a civil petition claiming the e-mail of their public law while maintaining competition relations with the United Nations at the time of bidding for domestic waterworks and sewerage construction works, by a commercial member, who transferred sewage treatment technology from the German Bige International Gmbh company, and asserting the construction of the other public law. On January 2015, the Defendants attempted to use the transaction statement from the Korean bank account (205-348208-13-001) in the name of the company, which was acquired by F in accordance with the court’s order in the submission of the first installment claim lawsuit (Shap District Court Decision 2013, 2013, 1003, 100319) filed against the commercial member of the Republic of Korea.

On April 27, 2015, the Defendants conspired to submit to another person a public official in charge of Sung-gun H in Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun, the Sung-gun, who is a public official in charge of Sung-gun, the Sung-gun, the Sung-gun, the Sung-gun, who is a public official in charge, for the construction method applied to the small sewage treatment facilities constructed in the United Nations on C, and submitted to another person a written statement of transactions in the above account.

2. We examine whether the Defendants intentionally committed a violation of Article 4(5) of the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality (hereinafter “Real Name Financial Transactions Act”).

In light of the following circumstances recognized by the record, a prosecutor has been submitted.