beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.09.17 2015노949

전자금융거래법위반

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable in light of the fact that the Defendant was aware that it was related to singing crimes from the beginning, and that the Defendant was not involved in the instant crime, and that the Defendant’s mistake was divided and reflected, and that the benefits acquired from the instant crime were not significant.

2. The judgment of the Defendant is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant that: (a) the Defendant transferred a means of access that can be used for a crime, such as telephone financial fraud, etc. to obtain money from the financial transaction users; (b) the amount of the Bosing damage that the Defendant withdrawn and deposited into the account exceeds KRW 290 million; and (c) the Defendant acquired financial profits several times in return for the transfer and use of the account.

However, there are circumstances that the defendant has divided his mistake into one another, and the number of times the defendant transferred the means of access is one time, and the actual gain of the means of access is not significant compared to the total amount of damage caused by the Bophishing crime, and that the defendant first did not know the process of the crime and appeared to have participated in the crime at first, can be considered as a favorable sentencing factor.

In addition, considering the circumstances and motive leading the Defendant to commit the instant crime, circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, age, character and conduct, environment, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.

[Separate Judgment] Facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence recognized by this court and summary of evidence are as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below.