209No4505 Foreign Exchange Transactions Act

Gangwon (33 years old, female)

Prosecutor

Maximumization

Attorney Gangwon-at-law (Korean National Assembly)

Busan District Court Decision 2009 High Court Decision 5394 Decided December 2, 2009

April 9, 2010

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The prosecutor stated that the defendant does not engage in money exchange after the crime was previously declared at the date of pleading at the court below. Since the place of crime in this case and the place of crime for which judgment became final and conclusive are different, there is a renewal of the criminal intent, the judgment of the court below is affirmed.

Although the facts charged and the facts charged in this case should be deemed to have the so-called concurrent crimes, each of the facts charged is deemed to have the relation of comprehensive crimes, and thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles as to comprehensive crimes, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Summary of the facts charged in this case

The defendant is a person who conducts the money exchange business without registration. A person who intends to conduct the money exchange business, such as the purchase or sale of foreign currencies, is equipped with facilities necessary for conducting the money exchange business and without any registration in spite of being registered with the Minister of Strategy and Finance in advance as prescribed by Presidential Decree. Around April 30, 2009, the defendant received 10,000 won from the old and new bank located in the central Dong of Jung-gu, Busan, and carried on the money exchange business by exchanging 10,000 won from the old and new bank located in the central Dong of Jung-gu, Busan, and one copy of the 20th and the 10th 10th

B. Judgment of the court below

According to the records, the defendant was found to have been sentenced to a fine of two million won by the court on June 10, 2009 for the criminal facts that he operated a foreign exchange business without registration, and the above judgment was finalized on June 18, 2009. The criminal facts for which the above judgment became final and the charges for which the above judgment was made before the above judgment was sentenced are related to a single comprehensive crime, and the facts charged for which the above judgment became final and conclusive are binding on the facts charged for this case, and the facts charged for this case constitutes the time when

Where a number of acts falling under the name of the same crime continues to be conducted for a certain period under the single and continuous criminal intent and where the same legal benefits are the same, each of these acts shall be punished by a single comprehensive crime. Where a person conducts an unregistered exchange act for business for a certain period under the single and continuous criminal intent, all of them shall constitute a single crime under Articles 27 (1) 6 and 8 (3) of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act.

According to the records, on June 10, 2009, the defendant was sentenced to 2 million won to commit the crime of violating the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act at Busan District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 18, 2009. The criminal facts in the final and conclusive judgment are as follows: "The defendant is a person operating a money exchange business without registration, and even if he is required to make a registration with the Minister of Finance and Economy in conducting a foreign exchange business, he shall not make any registration." On September 5, 2008, the judgment of the court below is just and it cannot be viewed that the defendant's comprehensive exchange business was conducted for a certain period of time from 00 U.S. dollars to 102,00 won, and it cannot be viewed that the defendant's comprehensive exchange business was conducted within 16:40,000,0000 won, and it cannot be viewed that the final and conclusive judgment was conducted within 20,000,000 won for a single money exchange business for a certain period of time."

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, judge and senior judge;

Judge Lee Dong-dong

Judges Shin Jae-won