logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.04.10 2020고정268
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

In using and managing a means of access for electronic financial transactions, no one shall borrow or lend a means of access, or store, deliver or distribute a means of access, requiring or promising to receive, request or promise any compensation, unless otherwise expressly provided for in any other Act.

Nevertheless, around July 22, 2019, the Defendant received a proposal and accepted it, and then sent a physical card necessary for the repayment of principal and interest. On July 23, 2019, the Defendant sent Kwikset service provider, who sent the non-indicted No. 1 to the new bank account (D) in the name of the Defendant and notified the password to the Kwikset service provider, who sent the non-indicted No. 1 in the name of the Defendant to the new bank account (D) in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, Seoul.

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to receive a loan and lent the means of access.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. E statements;

1. A certificate of completion of the contract;

1. Application of the statutes on the contents of text, Kakao Stockholm conversations;

1. Relevant Article 49(4)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and Articles 6(3)2 and 6(3)2 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. For the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the crime of lending the means of access, as in the instant case, is a highly harmful crime, such as infringing on the safety and reliability of financial transactions and abusing it as a means of other crimes.

The defendant's cream card was actually used for the scaming crime, resulting in damage.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and opposed to the mistake.

There is no profit actually acquired after the defendant committed a crime by deceiving the horses of a person who has not received the name that the defendant borrowed.

The accused has been punished by a fine once for the crime of double crime only before he has been punished.

The defendant's age, character and character, environment, and the other circumstances.

arrow