전자금융거래법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Since a e-mail card was sent to a person who is not aware of the fact-finding that he/she was aware of the normal lending to another person, it cannot be deemed that the means of access was leased by promising the payment stipulated in the Electronic Financial Transactions Act. Since the Defendant sent the e-mail card and did not recognize the quid pro quo between the lending and the lending execution, it cannot be deemed that there was a criminal intent
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the circumstances indicated in the relevant judgment.
Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below closely, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no violation of law of misunderstanding of facts alleged by the defendant.
[The defendant's loan is made by the procedure of the receipt of documents, provisional approval, receipt of a repayment card, confirmation of whether the financial transaction is normal, recording, payment of loans, and sending of the contract. The defendant should prepare a repayment card to be used for the repayment of interest on the designated payment date each month in case where the loan is carried out with provisional approval, and after being informed that the repayment card should be entrusted to the person who has failed to pay the name during the transaction with the person who has not made the name, the defendant issued one copy of the physical card in this case at the provisional approval stage. Since the delivery of the physical card is a prerequisite for the loan, it is reasonable to view that the defendant delivered the means of access in return for the loan.]
The defendant's judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing recognizes the facts of the crime of this case, reflects his mistake, and does not repeat again, there is no record of punishment before this case, and it seems that he was living as a sincere social person, and the social relationship seems clear.