(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.02.16 2016노4279 | 리걸엔진

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) 광주지방법원 2017.02.16 2016노4279

전자금융거래법위반

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, for 10 months, for Defendant B and C, and for Defendant D.

Reasons

1. A summary of the grounds for appeal (1) The Prosecutor’s sentence (1) (1 year of imprisonment, 10 months of imprisonment, 10 months of confiscation, 10 months of imprisonment, 10 months of imprisonment, 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment, 1 year and 6 months of confiscation, 10 months of imprisonment, 100 of confiscation) is too un

(2) The sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The crime of delivery or storage of access media under Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)3 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act constitutes one crime for each access medium, and the crime of delivery or storage of multiple access media in a lump sum constitutes a single act of committing a crime of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and each crime constitutes a commercial concurrent relationship (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1530, Mar. 25, 2010). The Defendants kept and delivered or stored various cash cards at the time of the crime of delivery or storage of each access medium as indicated in the holding of the lower judgment. As such, each of the crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act is a commercial concurrent relationship.

However, the lower court erred by omitting judgment as to the Defendants’ receipt of each of the crimes in violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and thus, the lower court was unable to maintain any further judgment.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendants' unfair assertion of sentencing and the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing against the defendants, and the judgment of the court below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. The Defendants of the relevant legal provisions regarding criminal facts: Each electronic financial transaction law.

참조판례

-대법원 2010. 3. 25. 선고 2009도1530 판결

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2017.08.24 2017노1219

-대전지방법원 2017.04.13 2016노3727

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2016.04.28 2016노102

-서울북부지방법원 2016.01.29 2015노2076

-대전지방법원 2017.12.27 2017노1891