logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2013.11.14 2011도4440
컴퓨터등사용사기
Text

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul Southern District Court Panel Division.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 347-2 of the Criminal Act provides a punishment for the act of acquiring any benefits to property or having a third party acquire them, by making any data processed after inputting a false information or improper order into a computer or any other information processing device, or inputting or altering any information without any authority;

Here, “information of an improper order” means the entry of an order that should not be directed in light of the purpose of processing the administrative affairs scheduled in the administrative affairs system in question.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do128, Sept. 9, 2010). Therefore, even if “false information” is not included, an act of unreasonably altering or deleting individual orders constituting a program of the pertinent business process system, as well as an act of actively using errors generated in the program itself and allowing an improper processing of business affairs in light of the purpose of the business process, barring special circumstances, such act constitutes “influence of an unlawful order.”

2. In accordance with the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, the lower court acknowledged the fact that, when the balance of the virtual account becomes less than 1,000 won by inputting a bank refund order from the virtual account operated by the Internet site operated by the victim corporation, the Defendant entered the electronic lottery purchase order into the virtual account, the Defendant recognized the fact that the program error of the same amount of the virtual cash deposited into the virtual account as the KRW 1,000,000, and that the Defendant made the balance using it less than KRW 18,123,800, in total, deposited the Defendant’s virtual account by repeating the act of again entering the electronic lottery purchase order into the virtual account. The Defendant’s above act entered the bank refund order or lottery purchase order in accordance with the procedure permitted by the pertinent site, and as such, entered the program.

arrow