beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant’s application for the issuance of the instant credit card is obviously contrary to C’s will, if the Defendant had not obtained prior approval from C for the issuance of the credit card by the victim company under the name of the victim company C, and C has endeavored to cancel the application.
The judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the charges of attempted fraud on the ground that there is no evidence to support the Defendant’s intentional act of fraud, despite the fact that, if the Defendant did not obtain C’s consent or delegation and did not intend to obtain C’s credit card of this case under the name of C, the Defendant would have committed the crime of attempted fraud, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 5 million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. (1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant attempted to obtain one copy of the credit card in the name of C (hereinafter “the instant card”) by deceiving the said employee by means of telephone using the cell phone in the name of C, even though he was not delegated by C in connection with the issuance of the credit card, by using the phone in the name of C, even though he was not delegated by C in connection with the issuance of the credit card. However, the Defendant attempted to obtain one copy of the credit card in the name of C (hereinafter “the instant card”), by deceiving the said employee by means of using the cell phone in his own name as C, and by applying for the issuance of the credit card in the name of C. However, the Defendant, who became aware of this, attempted to withdraw the application for the issuance of the instant card.
(2) The lower court determined that the Defendant sent and informed C of the letters received from the card company only after the Defendant applied for the issuance of the instant card in the name of C, and that the Defendant applied for the instant card from C before applying for the card.