logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.10 2017고단4111
신용정보의이용및보호에관한법률위반
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No person other than a credit information company, credit information collection agency and credit information provider/user (hereinafter referred to as "credit information company, etc.") shall engage in business to find out the location and contact of a specific person.

Nevertheless, the defendant again requested the inquiry company to confirm the location or contact information of a specific person by the president of the Center (the director of the center or the director of the interest center) and requested it again, and received the specific person's location or contact information from the inquiry company and received it from the inquiry company, and delivered it to the president of the Center.

On May 9, 2016, the President D of the Center (Detention on June 8, 2017) requested to verify the debtor F's address and personal information from E by telephone at a non-permanent location on May 9, 2016, and requested the defendant to verify the insured's information, including the F's address, by informing the debtor F's telephone number (G).

On the same day, the Defendant informed the phone number of F to the inquirer with the name of the same day, and asked him to find out the subscriber information about F, and requested the above inquirer to transfer the “Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul H”, which is the F address discovered by the improper means, from the above inquirer, and notified it to the above D.

On the same day, the above D knew the above address delivered by the Defendant to the above E.

Accordingly, even if a credit information company is not a credit information company, the Defendant, in collusion with the above D and a non-name inquiry company, discovered the F’s location and notified the client thereof, from the time to May 31, 2017, and provided the client with the information about the location and contact of the specific person at least 12 times in collusion with the head of the center and the inquiry company.

After all, even if a credit information company is not a credit information company, the defendant identified the location and contact information of a specific person as a business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1.With respect to I and D police preparation.

arrow