logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.4.28.선고 2016고단132 판결
전자금융거래법위반
Cases

2016 Highest 132 Violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act

Defendant

Kim A (62 years, South Korea), Company Board

Residence

Reference domicile

Prosecutor

Park Gyeong-Gyeong (Court Prosecution) (Court of Justice) and Kim Jong-sik (Court of Justice)

Defense Counsel

Attorney Kim Jong-young (Korean National Assembly Line)

Imposition of Judgment

April 28, 2016

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five months.

Reasons

Facts of crime

No person shall issue a transaction request in electronic financial transactions or transfer a means of access used to secure the authenticity and accuracy of users and the details of such transaction.

Nevertheless, on July 2015, the Defendant: (a) was called to have a cream card sent by an unsatisfic person; (b) on July 2015, and (c) was called to have a cream terminal located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-do.

By using the express bus door, a physical card linked to the account of community credit cooperatives under the name of the defendant was sent to the above party.

Accordingly, the Defendant transferred the means of access to electronic financial transactions.

Summary of Evidence

(Omission)

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of criminal facts;

Article 49(4)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, Article 6(3)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and the choice of imprisonment

Reasons for sentencing

The Defendant transferred a passbook with the passbook as in the instant case, and was investigated more than six times on account of the fact that the means of access was used for the scaming crime, and repeated the same crime (the Defendant sent the means of access to obtain a loan as in the instant case at any time). The instant crime was committed against the Defendant, who was under his criminal trial, was committed against the Defendant again in the said re-market, and the Defendant promised not to commit the said crime again in the said re-market, and thus, reduced the fine under the summary Order.

It is inevitable to sentence the Defendant to the effect that the Defendant actually suffered from the transfer of the means of access, and that the Defendant actually suffered from singishing damage.

Judges

Judges Lee Jong-sung

arrow