Supreme Court: "Providing Suspect with Crime Opportunity Constitutes 'Entrapment'; Not Illegal if Crime Plan Already Existed"

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] The Supreme Court has ruled that when investigative agencies conduct investigations by setting traps to induce a suspect's crime, if the suspect had already planned to commit the crime regardless of the trap investigation, such trap investigation is not illegal.

The Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice Min Yoo-sook) announced on the 26th that it upheld the original sentence of one year imprisonment in the final appeal of Mr. A, who was indicted for violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.

The court stated, "Even if the investigative agency was partially involved in the crime process, it merely provided an opportunity for the crime to a defendant who already had criminal intent," and dismissed the appeal.

Mr. A was prosecuted for holding a check card connected to a "ghost account" after receiving a proposal from Mr. B last October, who said, "If you withdraw cash using the check card linked to the ghost account, I will give you a fee."

It was investigated that the check card managed by Mr. A was used in Mr. B's voice phishing crime. To participate in this voice phishing, Mr. A left his Telegram ID as a comment on an internet community post seeking accomplices and met Mr. B at a secret location to receive the check card.

The first trial sentenced Mr. A to one year imprisonment.

Mr. A appealed the verdict, claiming that the police conducted an illegal trap investigation to arrest him. He argued that the police had Mr. B propose the crime to him and lured him to arrest him.

The second trial court rejected Mr. A's claim. Considering the overall conduct when Mr. A committed the crime, the court judged that Mr. A was already aware that he was engaging in illegal activities.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.