logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.18 2016고단7969
사기등
Text

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, from the date of the final judgment of this case, each of the above two years against the Defendants.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendants were those who operated with “G” mobile phone sales stores located in the F1st floor in Jung-gu Seoul Central Government.

1. Fraud (International Moble Equation) is an international mobile device identification number used for the purpose of maintaining and managing a mobile phone, including opening of a mobile phone, theft, and loss registration; and a domestic radio operator is only able to open multiple mobile phoness by being assigned one IMO to one mobile phone, and is not allowed to open multiple mobile phones to the same IMO;

Nevertheless, the Defendants abused the fact that a telecommunications company paid opening fees and did not recover opening fees when a certain amount of call is generated for three months or more, and that management of opening of a mobile phone is performed only by the IMFI. On August 2015, the Defendants made an Internet advertisement, such as “defluence of credit, lack of communication, and immediately opening of the latest smartphone,” and offered to the persons who have discovered the advertisement one through three new mobile phones under their names by paying cash amounting to KRW 500,000 per unit of the mobile phone. ② High-priced new mobile phones sell 70-800,000 won per unit to the domestic mobile phone export, and ③ artificially receiving the phone calls between the viable mobile phones, etc., thereby obtaining support for the acquisition of the phone from the telecommunications company.

Accordingly, on October 28, 2015, the Defendants received documents necessary for the opening of the mobile phone, such as a copy of identification cards and a new application, from H, which reported the above mobile phone loan advertisement at the above mobile phone sales store, and pretended that they would normally pay the service fee, such as telephone charges, and had the victim case corporation, which is unaware of such fact open a new phone under H’s name.

However, the above advertisements are reported.

arrow