logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.11.23 2016고단2221
전자금융거래법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay a fine, one hundred thousand won shall be the day.

Reasons

Criminal facts

On March 2016, the Defendant transferred the physical card and password of the bank account (C) opened in the name of the Defendant to the Defendant’s friendship B in an influent market located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the report of investigation;

1. Article 49 of the Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense, Article 49 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions through which punishment is selected, and Article 6 (3) 1 and Article 6 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions through which a fine is selected;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 4(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act governing jurisdiction of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides land jurisdiction as the place of crime, the address, domicile, or present place of residence of the defendant.

However, since the criminal facts charged in this case are specified as "Seoul", the court cannot be deemed to have jurisdiction over this case based on the criminal facts. According to the records, the defendant's address, domicile or present place of residence does not fall under the jurisdiction of this court.

However, at the time of prosecution, the court of first instance did not have jurisdiction over the land of this case.

Even if the defendant does not make a request for violation of jurisdiction, it is not a sentence of violation of jurisdiction.

arrow