logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.10.27 2017고단1329
횡령등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 6 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On March 20, 2017, the Defendant violated the Electronic Financial Transactions Act: (a) received and consented to an advertising message from an employee in charge of telephone financial fraud, namely, “B”, to pay KRW 800,000 to one week from a bank account; and (b) sent the e-mail card connected to the Defendant’s name bank account (D) in front of Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on the same day to Kwikset, through Kwikset’s service.

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to pay for the price and lent the approaching media.

2. The embezzlement: (a) the Defendant lent a eck card connected to the national bank account, as described in paragraph (1), and then used the eck card to pay for the Defendant’s goods by remitting KRW 3,213,00 from the victim E to the bank account in the name of the Defendant’s customer (State) at around March 21, 2017.

As a result, the Defendant, who was remitted to the national bank account under the name of the Defendant, embezzled the above KRW 3,200,500 for personal use in mind.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. E statements;

1. Application of remittance receipts, customer information inquiry table (personal information), financial transaction details, and output of the Kakao Stockholm conversation content statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)2 (a) of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions (a point of lending access media), Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act (a point of embezzlement) and the selection of fines, respectively;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The fact that the reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is being wrong, and the primary offender has not been recovered under favorable circumstances.

arrow