logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
대구지방법원 2019.07.18 2018노4603
전자금융거래법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, after hearing the speech that he would cause a loan from a person who was not the name, sent a physical card connected to the C Bank account, and did not transfer it.

B. The lower court’s sentencing of an unreasonable sentencing (7 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor made a determination of mistake of facts ① the Defendant’s transfer of the means of access.

(Article 49(4)1 and Article 6(3)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (Article 6(3)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act) are not facts charged but also acts of lending means of access knowing that they will be used for crimes.

(Article 49(4)2 and Article 6(3)3 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (Article 6(4)3 of the same Act) have been prosecuted as facts charged, and the lower court found guilty as facts charged.

According to the evidence examined by the court below, it can be recognized that the defendant lent the means of access knowing that he will be used for the crime like the facts stated in the judgment below, and the defendant's assertion is premised upon the judgment below's conviction as the facts charged.

B. In full view of the various circumstances, including the fact that the means of access leased by the Defendant regarding the assertion of unfair sentencing was actually used for the crime of scaming, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, circumstance, means and consequence of the crime, etc., which are conditions for the sentencing, and the lower court’s sentencing is not unfair, in view of the following facts: (a) there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that could change the sentencing after the lower court’s judgment.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.

arrow