logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.06.16 2019노530
전자금융거래법위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) is as follows: (a) although it is necessary to verify whether the Defendant was involved in the opening and transfer of each of the accounts listed in the annexed list of crimes in the original judgment (hereinafter “each of the accounts of this case”), the lower court did not proceed with the examination related thereto, and found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged against the Defendant, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles due to

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the current trial statement of the witness D of the party trial, the court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant was involved in the establishment B (hereinafter “B”) by issuing his/her resident registration certificate, etc. to his/her person in poor name.

However, the following circumstances that can be recognized by the above evidence are: ① the facts charged of this case is premised on the premise that the defendant opened an account under the name of B and directly transferred the electronic financial means, such as the physical card and password, to the non-party who was named. There is no evidence to prove that the defendant promised to receive a direct loan from the non-party in his name and transferred the electronic financial means to the non-party in his name; ② the witness D merely received documents related to the defendant from the "K and its daily allowances (hereinafter "K, etc.") in relation to the opening of each of the accounts in this case, and it did not reach the defendant or did not have any contact with the defendant; ② the defendant opened the account in the name of B and opened the account in this case to the "K, etc.," and the defendant was directly involved in the opening of each of the accounts in this case; ③ At the time of opening the account, D cannot directly establish the account in the name of the party in whose name the cell phone number was directly verified by the proxy bank.

arrow