전자금융거래법위반
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant is deemed to have only the head of the Tong to be reissued after the loss of the head of the Tong. The Defendant reported the loss of the head of the Tong and received a re-issuance of the head of the Tong, but did not report the fact that the head of the Tong should separately report the loss
Since the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by misunderstanding the above facts, it erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The lower court’s judgment stated that ① the account in its holding remains 4,010 won as of May 31, 2016; ② the Defendant deposited 4,000 won on the same day; ② the account in its holding on June 2, 2016, which was 200 after the above withdrawal date, deposited 3,60,000 won into the account in its holding as of June 2, 2016; ③ the Defendant was investigated by police and prosecutor’s office, and ③ the Defendant did not keep the password of the above amount in its holding and the card in its holding on the passbook or the card. According to the Defendant’s assertion, it is impossible for the Defendant to withdraw the amount immediately after deposit into the account in its name as of May 31, 2016; ④ the Defendant was released from the account in its holding that it was destroyed by the Defendant’s new statement on June 1, 2016, which was 201.