logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2020.06.30 2020고단184
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 transfer or acquire a means of access in using and managing the means of access under the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.

Nevertheless, around October 15, 2019, the Defendant received a proposal from a person who was named in the name, Seogu-gu, Daegu-gu, that “the head and interest payment of principal and interest would be harmed,” and transferred the means of access under the Electronic Financial Transactions Act by delivering one physical card connected to the company bank account (C) under the name of the Defendant to the above person via Kwikset Service.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the details of entry into and departure, financial transaction details, and carkakao text messages;

1. Relevant Article 49(4)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and Articles 49(4)1 and 6(3)1 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is likely to seriously affect society by not only impairing the safety and reliability of electronic financial transactions, but also creating a large number of victims by abusing the means of access, such as financial fraud, etc.

The means of access actually transferred by the defendant was used for financial fraud crimes.

Considering these circumstances, it is true that there is a need for strict punishment against the defendant.

However, the circumstances are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case as well as that he would not repeat again, that he responded to a request made for provision on the ground of loan, etc., and there is any reason to consider the motive for the crime, and that there is no criminal records punished against the defendant.

The sentence was determined as the order by actively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

arrow