logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 군산지원 2019.10.16 2019고단909
전자금융거래법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

In using and managing a means of access, no one shall lend the means of access while receiving, demanding or promising compensation, unless otherwise specifically provided for in any other Act.

Nevertheless, on February 25, 2019, the Defendant issued a proposal that “When sending a e-mail card, the Defendant would have created transaction performance and borrowed KRW 20 million to him/her.” On February 25, 2019, the Defendant sent one e-mail card connected to the D Association account (Account Number E) in the name of the Defendant at the Hysan-dong Central Office of Hysan-si, Seoul and then lent the means of access to him/her in return for the intangible expected interest that can receive future loans.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a petition (-a statement on details of account transactions, text messages, etc.) and a report on internal investigation (A statement on financial transaction information);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts and Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (Selection of Fines) of the choice of punishment [to select fines in consideration of the following: (a) the act of lending means of access, etc. prohibited by the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, such as lending, etc., can be abused for crimes, such as engaging in new service, evasion of taxes, and gambling, etc.; (b) the act of lending means of access has been committed as long as social abolition has been promised and the act of lending means of access has been committed; and (c) the actual occurrence of the victim of Bophishing is not easy to take into account the fact that there is no record of punishment exceeding the Defendant’s serious reflectness

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

arrow