The meaning of the "use of credit cards" under the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act, and whether it can be seen that the use of credit cards has been completed if the transaction by credit cards itself was cancelled before the completion (negative)

"Use of a credit card" under the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act refers to a series of acts of a credit card holder presenting a credit card to a credit card merchant for the payment of the price, which is the original purpose of the credit card, and signing and delivering a credit card sales slip. In full view of Article 70(5) of the Act as well as separate penal provisions for attempted use of a credit card, a credit card transaction with a credit card should reach the end of the transaction by preparing a sales slip, etc., and if the transaction itself was cancelled prior to the completion of the transaction itself, the credit card use cannot be deemed to have reached the end of the transaction.

Article 70(1)2 and (5) of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act

[Plaintiff, Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant) and 3 others (Law Firm 1994Sang, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant 1 and two others

Kim Jong-woo

Attorney Han-han

Defendant 1 and 2 shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and three months, and by imprisonment for eight months.

Of detention days before the issuance of this judgment, 78 days for Defendant 1, and 79 days for Defendant 2 and 3 shall be included in each penalty.

Criminal facts

Defendant 1 was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 2 years of suspended sentence for a violation of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act at the Incheon District Court on April 17, 2003, and 4.25 years of suspended sentence, and is still in the grace period. The Defendants conspired with Defendant 3 to deduct information on the credit card if Defendant 3 is employed as delivery service to another person and bring about a credit card to be mailed from another person, thereby forging the credit card and distributing it by deceiving money and valuables.

1. On August 12, 2003, Defendant 3 employed in a credit card delivery business from around August 200 to around August 20, deducted the credit card from the letter bags sealed by Defendant 2, Defendant 1, Defendant 1 read the credit card’s own records to the carder and stored the information on each credit card in the computer disk, then Defendant 1 requested Defendant 1 to the Nonindicted Party 1, and made it copied each one of the credit cards in the name of Kim Jong-ju, Jong-dong, Seocho-gu, Seoul, Seoul, by using the credit card information stored by the credit card information stored by him.

2. On August 19, 2003, at the Square of Yong-gu around 18:35, Defendant 1 attempted to acquire property benefits by acquiring the amount equivalent to the above amount from the Sti Bank by transfer from the Sti Bank to the account, but Defendant 1 did not intend to make an application for the revocation of the sale so that the amount of KRW 3,00,000, each of the goods with the credit card in the name of Kimju, Jong-gu, Jin-gu, Seoul, as the former owner of the goods was purchased from the 'Tri-gu, Seoul' trade. However, Defendant 1 attempted to acquire property benefits by obtaining the amount equivalent to the above amount of money from the Fti Bank to the account, the credit card company did not intend to obtain and attempted to use the money by making an application for the revocation of the sale excessively large amounts of fees from the credit card company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made by the Defendants in the court

1. Examination protocol of suspect against Kim-ju by the prosecution;

1. A statement prepared by the refining materials;

1. A certificate prepared by a seed bank credit management department;

1. Investigation report (169-171 pages, 237-264 pages of investigation records);

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Article 70 (1) 1, 2 and (5) of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act, Articles 352, 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Calculation of days pending trial: Article 57 of the Criminal Act;

Parts of innocence

Since the forged credit card use portion among the charges was prosecuted with the effect that the act of original use was completed, it will be judged on that part.

"Use of a credit card" under the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act refers to a series of acts by a credit card holder to present a credit card to a credit card merchant for the payment of the price for the original purpose of the credit card and to sign and deliver a sales slip (see Supreme Court Decisions 92Do77, Jun. 9, 1992; 93Do604, Nov. 23, 1993; 93Do604, Nov. 23, 1993). In full view of Article 70(5) of the above Act, the provision on attempted use of a credit card should be separately provided for in Article 70(5) of the above Act, to the extent that the use of the credit card is completed by the preparation of sales slip, etc., and the use of the credit card can not be deemed to have been completed if the transaction was revoked prior to

In this case, there is no evidence to prove that the signature of the sales slip was made and the transaction was completed, and even according to the facts charged or the content of investigation report (Investigation Record 32-38 pages, 298 pages), the Defendants attempted to make a transaction by a forged credit card, but requested the cardholder to cancel the transaction with the approval of the card company, and finally terminated by the cancellation of the sales (in relation to the sales under the name of the card company, there is no evidence to deem that the Defendants did not request the cancellation of the sales, or that the Defendants knew that the sales was not finally cancelled). In such a case, it cannot be said that the use of the credit card was completed prior to the cancellation of the transaction by the forged credit card.

Therefore, although the charges on the part of the used credit card, which was forged, constitute innocence, the conviction of the attempted use of the forged credit card is recognized, so the order does not decide the innocence separately.

Judges Park Jong-chul