beta
(영문) 대법원 2013.08.22 2011도15577

여신전문금융업법위반

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 70(2)2(a) of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act (amended by Act No. 1062, Mar. 12, 2010; hereinafter the same) provides that “a person who lends money to another person” shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years.

Furthermore, Article 2 subparag. 3 of the same Act provides that “Credit card” means a card issued by a credit card company (including a person operating a credit card business in a foreign country) to repeatedly purchase goods or provide services or settle matters as determined by the Ordinance of the Prime Minister by presenting an objection, and further sets the “credit card” and “pre-paid card” as a type of card separate from that of the credit card.

Meanwhile, according to the records, if a credit card company that purchases goods and services requests a settlement of purchase price, such as goods, etc., issued by the credit card company in accordance with an agreement concluded with the credit card company under the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act, and the credit card company pays such purchase price to the purchaser company, and the purchasing company later pays such settlement price and fees, etc., and the purchasing company is a kind of electronic commerce method in which the credit card company pays the purchase price and fees to the credit card company. It is not a general credit card, but a credit card number that allows the purchasing company to pay the purchase price under the credit card transaction agreement.

2. The facts charged of this case is a method of trade under the premise that the above exclusive-use card for business purchase falls under the credit card stipulated in the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act, and by pretending to sell goods or provide services using