logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.06.26 2018고단1739
전자금융거래법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Criminal facts

Except as otherwise expressly provided for in other Acts, no person shall transfer or take over any access medium, or lend or take over any access medium in return for promising to receive any consideration.

Nevertheless, on March 20, 2018, the Defendant lent a medium of access to the account after receiving letters from a person with no name, and thought to acquire 3 million won cash on three days. On the same day, on the front of the building in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the Defendant sent the check card to the national bank account (C) opened in the name of the defendant on the road in front of the building in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and notified the password by mobile phone text.

As a result, the Defendant promised to pay for the access media used in electronic financial transactions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a search and inspection warrant;

1. Article 49 of the Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense, Article 49 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions through which punishment is selected, and Article 6 (3) 2 of the same Act, and Article 6 (3) 2 of the same Act, and selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (hereinafter “The Criminal Procedure Act”) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides for the following facts: (a) although the access media leased by the Defendant for the reason of sentencing is not suitable for the commission of the phishing, the sentence shall be determined as ordered in light of the following: (b) the Defendant was the first offender with no criminal history; (c) the Defendant’s mistake is against himself; and (d) the Defendant appears to have failed to obtain the consideration

arrow