The court of appeals sentenced a heavier punishment than the original trial to a boyfriend with an intellectual disability who used a micropayment service worth millions of won with his girlfriend's mobile phone.
According to the legal community today (14th), the 1st Criminal Division of the Gangneung Branch of the Chuncheon District Court (Chief Judge Lee Dong-hee) sent a trial court that sentenced A (27), who had been charged with fraudulent use of computers, etc., to two years in prison and a fine of 2 million won. He was sentenced to 2 years and 4 months in prison and a fine of 2 million won.
Person A, who is intellectually disabled, borrowed a mobile phone from her girlfriend B (22), who is suffering from severe intellectual disability for about one year from August 2019, and paid about 5.6 million won 53 times, He is accused of stealing a cell phone and trying to sell it on a second-hand trading site, etc.
In addition, while living in a group with other intellectually disabled people, Mr. A assaulted or threatened Mr. B, and received another girlfriend's cell phone from Mr. C to use the micropayment service.
To Mr. A, who had to stand in court, the court of first instance pointed out, "He acted as the head of a group of people with intellectual disabilities based on his superior strength and intelligence, and he assaulted and threatened several times." sentenced.
However, the first trial court said, "There is no problem with Mr. B's communication ability, and he has reached a state of inability to transact on property," said the first instance judge on the charge of 'quasi-fraud' in which Mr. It's hard to see," he acquitted.
However, the Court of Appeals decided otherwise.
The Court of Appeal overturned the acquittal and upheld the conviction, saying "quasi-fraud does not mean that the victim must reach a state of inability to transact on property, and people with intellectual disabilities have a weak decision-making ability and are not easily able to refuse a request." got off
The court of appeals explained the reason for the sentencing, saying, "(Defendant) has already committed the same crime even though he has been punished several times for fraud using computers." .