The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to Article 32(6) and (1) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies (hereinafter “Financial Control Act”) and Article 5(37 of the Enforcement Decree of the Enforcement Decree, a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act should be tried and sentenced separately from other crimes. However, it is reasonable to view that the provisions of separate review and sentence under Article 32(6) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies apply only where the defendant falls under the subject of examination of eligibility under Article 32(1) of the same Act.

Therefore, even according to the record, there is no evidence to view that the defendant falls under the subject of examination of eligibility under Article 32 (1) of the Act on the Management of Financial Services and Capital Markets. Thus, the court below's decision that the defendant did not separately examine and decide the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and other crimes among the facts charged in this case against the defendant.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on Article 32(6) of the Act on the Management of Financial Companies.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.