200 Highest 2748 Violation of the Price Stabilization Act

A

Kim Jae-woo (Lawsuit) and Park Jin-Jin (Trial)

Law Firm Han-mun et al.

[Defendant-Appellant]

July 24, 2020

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

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted into one day.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

Criminal facts

The defendant is a person who operates electronic commerce business in the name of "D" in the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B apartment C.

No business operator shall commit an act of cornering or evading the sale of goods for the purpose of making excessive profits, which is designated by the Minister of Strategy and Finance as a store and hoarding act (or an act of not selling such goods within ten days from the date of purchase, in cases of a business operator whose business date is less than two months on the basis of the date of investigation).

Around February 7, 2020, the Defendant purchased 1650,000 won per sheet (1,650 won per sheet) 1,650,000 won from an enterprise “F” through E, which was known to the general public, around February 7, 2020, and sold 10,000 won of the above Mack for health care through the above E around February 28, 2020.

As a result, the Defendant, who was a business operator with less than two months, did not return the mast for health, and did not sell it within ten days from the purchase date of the mast for the purpose of the masting.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement to E, G, H, I, and J;

1. Business registration certificate and electronic tax invoice;

1. A written accusation;

1. Report on internal investigation (Attachment of D’s history of sales) and investigation report (e-mail online sales price);

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 26 and 7 (Selection of Fine) of the Act on the Price Stabilization

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

The Defendant kept in custody to purchase and sell the Mask for health care, which was not handled normally to take economic benefits using a situation where the supply and demand of the Mask for health care is not smooth due to a new type of cro or virus incident, and then sell it at high prices. The nature of the crime is not good. The Defendant vindicateed to the effect that his act was not illegal. However, at the time of the crime of this case, it was widely known that the Defendant discovered and punished the act of taking the Mask for health care through the press to the effect that he was not aware that his act was illegal. However, the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the amount of profit acquired by the crime of this case was not significant, but the Defendant was aware of his mistake, that the Defendant was against himself, that the Defendant was aware of his mistake, that the Defendant was the first offender, that the amount of profit acquired by the crime of this case, the amount of the Defendant’s age, character, environment, motive, means and

Judges Suh-hee