logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2019.01.11 2017고정962
금융실명거래및비밀보장에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No person who has obtained transaction information provided or disclosed in violation of the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality shall provide or divulge such transaction information, etc. to any third party, if he/she becomes aware of such violation.

Nevertheless, at a place where the location is unknown on October 2016, the Defendant was provided with the details of account transactions in the bank account in the name of F, which was known in the course of the C religious Organization Diplomatic Association and E (Seoul Eastern District Court 2016Gahap106856) and posted the article “H” in the G Press newspaper on November 4, 2016, and posted the article on the said article that “H” in the above F’s account, the Defendant handled only the account holder, account number, back, payment amount, deposited amount, etc., and posted a notice stating the name of the account holder, goods, new, management point, transaction date, book, balance, etc.

Accordingly, the Defendant disclosed to another person the above transaction information received from B with knowledge that B provided or divulged transaction information in violation of the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Some statements in the police statement concerning B;

1. An investigation report (attached data submitted by reference witnesses B, such as a letter of delegation), an investigation report (attached data sent by e-mail of the details of financial transactions);

1. To close a newspaper article related to the distribution of financial transaction information;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the act of the defendant constitutes a justifiable act for the purpose of public interest.

On the other hand, it is necessary to determine whether a certain act is justified as an act that does not contravene the social norms, and thus, the illegality should be removed individually by examining and reasonably under specific circumstances. Thus, in order to recognize such legitimate act, the motive or purpose of the act is justifiable, and the means of the act is the means of such act.

arrow