logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2017.11.27 2017고정221
전자금융거래법위반
Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On February 16, 2017, the Defendant ought to make false transaction details, as the transaction details amounting to KRW 40 million should be made from the person who was unable to make a loan by telephone from the person who was unable to use his name by telephone from the Ulsan Metropolitan City, Ulsan Metropolitan City, Ulsan Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the “Ulsan Metropolitan City”).

The phrase “a request to withdraw money from the account and deliver it to the person sending the money to the person who has received the proposal,” which knowingly consented to the above proposal with the knowledge that the nameless person will use the bank account in the name of the defendant for the crime, and accordingly sent a copy of the passbook in the name of the defendant by facsimile.

On February 20, 2017, the person under whose name was not the victim's name was called "(30 million won may be loaned, but 14 million won shall be deposited to increase credit rating)". The person under whose name was the victim's account in the name of the defendant was remitted from the victim to the Saemaul Treasury account in the name of the defendant on the same day.

On February 20, 2017, around 13:38, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 14 million deposited in the Defendant’s account from 4 exit located in Guro-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Guro-gu, 351, to the Defendant’s account and delivered it to the Defendant who sent his name.

Accordingly, the Defendant made it easy to commit the fraud of the above-mentioned person without his name, etc., and prevented it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel asserts to the effect that there was no intention of aiding and abetting fraud because he/she had known that the defendant's account would be used for crime, and therefore there was no intention of aiding and abetting fraud.

However, the following circumstances, i.e., the Defendant already transferred a physical card and password in order to obtain a loan on January 22, 2015.

arrow