logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2020.11.13 2019노1849
전자금융거래법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, by mistake of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, decided to grant a loan to a person who assumes a false name or a person who is not a person who assumes the name of the lending company at the end of the lending consultation, and demands that “the person in question send a physical card to collect principal and interest,” and accordingly, sent the physical card under the name of the Defendant, and does not receive any compensation, nor lend the means of access.

Nevertheless, the court below judged otherwise and sentenced the defendant guilty, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles in the original judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court’s judgment. The lower court rejected the above assertion based on the following reasoning. The Defendant and the defense counsel argued to the effect that “The Defendant and the defense counsel stated that “The Defendant would lend 10 million won to a person without a name-based counsel,” and that the Defendant would not receive any money, such as the principal and interest payment, and there was no money, remuneration, etc. that the Defendant would have been provided because the person without a name-based title was merely a withdrawal of the principal and interest, and that prior to the determination of the lending of the means of access in this case, the Defendant would receive any payment and did not lend the means of access. However, the following circumstances revealed by the aforementioned evidence are revealed in the Defendant’s police investigation process: (i) the Defendant sent the account number, identification card, details of transactions, etc. in consultation with the person without a name-based title, and sent the “the person without a name-based title-based card,” and sent it to the passbook prior to receipt of the loan and password.

arrow