1. Exchangeing only once with no commercial purpose, for profit-making purposes, under Article 10 (1) of the Foreign Exchange Control Act.

shall not constitute a business.

Money exchange only once with no commercial purpose or continuous purpose does not constitute money exchange business as prescribed by Article 10 (1) of the old Foreign Exchange Control Act (amended by Act No. 4447 of Dec. 27, 91).

Article 10 (1) of the Foreign Exchange Control Act, Article 35 of the Foreign Exchange Control Act, Article 4 subparagraph 15 of the Foreign Exchange Control Act

Defendant 1 and one other

Prosecutor

Seoul Criminal District Court Decision 69No797 delivered on January 27, 1970, Seoul High Court Decision 69No797 delivered on January 27, 1970

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

For the purpose of Article 4 (15) of the Foreign Management Act, the term "securities exchange business" means the sale and purchase of foreign currencies and those issued in foreign countries.

The term "purchase of a consumer check" means the purchase of a consumer check that is merely an explanation of what is the content of the business for money exchange and that such an act is not continuous for profit.

However, since the court below does not purport to regard it as having been engaged in money exchange business only once, the court below's opinion that defendant 2 3 puts on one time as shown in the facts charged No. 3

of this fact, even if it may be recognized that the Japanese currency was exchanged for the Korean currency, the defendant only has this fact.

The so-called "Foreign Exchange Control Act" shall not be deemed to have been engaged in this money exchange business, and therefore it is justifiable to determine that the so-called "Foreign Exchange Control Act" does not constitute a crime under Article 10

Justices Hong Yong-Nam (Presiding Justice)