(영문) 청주지방법원 2021.01.28 2020고정799

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 청주지방법원 2021.01.28 2020고정799

사기등

Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who was living together with B and B from June 2017 to July 2018.

1. On April 3, 2018, around 13:57, the Defendant, such as the electronic records, stored B’s certificate of recognition in the Nowon-gu Seoul building and the Nowon-gu, which was used together with B living together with the building C and the building D living together with B, and with the signation that he/she knows the password of the above certificate of recognition, in B’s name, had the intention to open a opphone X mobile phone in the name of B.

The defendant sent a new service contract to E electronic server, which contains the above contents, by accessing the above Nowon-gu Internet site to enter B's name, resident number, etc., and certifying the password of the official certificate.

Accordingly, the defendant has forged a new service contract in the name of the victim, who is an electronic record of another person's obligation to perform his/her duties for the purpose of hindering administrative affairs.

2. The Defendant used the Nowon-gu, which was used together with the Defendant, to transmit the forged files to E via the Internet that he/she knew of the forgery, and exercised as if they were duly formed.

3. The Defendant, at the same time and at the same place as above 1, entered the victim E-stock mobile phone seller F in a computerized input of B’s personal information as the victim E-stock company B, and applied for a new opening of the opon X mobile phone mobile phone operator E with the identification number of the official stamp and with the radio operator E.

The Defendant, who believed such computerized data to be true, was newly opened from the victim company that believed to be true, A.S. X mobile phone (G).

However, even though the defendant did not have received any authority from B in the opening of Aphone X in the name of B, he acquired the property by opening the phone X mobile phone from the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The police of the defendant.

유사 판례

-제주지방법원 2018.02.28 2017고단668

-인천지방법원 2018.04.16 2017고정2383

-대구지방법원 김천지원 2021.02.03 2019고단1364 (1)

-서울남부지방법원 2018.06.20 2018고단1137

-울산지방법원 2017.09.01 2016고단4169