beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2018.11.29 2018고단1984

전자금융거래법위반

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No person shall lend any medium access to electronic financial transactions while receiving, demanding or promising such consideration.

Nevertheless, around 12:00 on June 19, 2018, the Defendant issued a proposal to the effect that, in light of the fact that the Defendant was in the building in the building in Northern-gu B, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si, the Defendant would lend one physical card to 300,000 won per share through the Kakao Kao Kao Stockholm, and then deliver one physical card connected to the Defendant’s bank account in the name of the Defendant using Kwikkset’s Kwi’s service.

As a result, the Defendant promised to pay for, lent the electronic financial transaction access media.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Photographs of deposits made from damage;

1. Response to a request for financial transaction information (A);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (Attachment of detailed conversations between a suspect and his/her name)

1. Article 49 of the Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 49 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions through which punishment is selected (excluding punishment); Article 6 (3) 2 of the same Act (excluding punishment);

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The access media leased by the Defendant for the reason of sentencing Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was used to commit fraud and the victim was generated.

However, the defendant's mistake is recognized.

The defendant has no history of criminal punishment.

In addition, the punishment shall be determined as per the order by comprehensively taking into account various factors of sentencing as shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, family relationship, etc.