logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2019.06.11 2019고단155
전자금융거래법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No person shall transfer or take over a means of access, or lend or take over a means of access in return for compensation.

On November 15, 2018, the Defendant promised to receive rent of KRW 800,000 per day from his workplace in Daegu-si Si, a Party B, and sent a physical card connected to the account (Account Number: D) under the name of the Defendant to his own beneficiary through Kwikset Service Articles.

Accordingly, the defendant agreed to receive compensation and lent the means of access to electronic financial transactions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. E statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to warrant of search, seizure and verification;

1. Relevant Article 49(4)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and Articles 6(3)2 and 6(3)2 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is likely to seriously affect society by not only impairing the safety and reliability of electronic financial transactions, but also creating a large number of victims by abusing the means of access, such as financial fraud, etc.

In fact, the means of access that the defendant lent was used for financial fraud crimes.

Furthermore, the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of it even during the period of repeated crime.

Considering these circumstances, it is true that there is a need for strict punishment against the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant is recognized to commit the crime, and that the defendant has no record of punishment for the same criminal record, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

The sentence was determined as the order by actively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

arrow