본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

자율계산대를 이용한 불법영득행위 - 독일의 논의를 중심으로 -

Illegal profits acquisitions through exploiting the self-checkout -focused on discussion in Germany

0

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

This paper deals with the problem of distinguishing between theft and computer fraud surrounding the self-checkout from the point of view of criminal law. The subject of this paper is especially focused on discussion relating to computer fraud (“Computerbetrug”) in Germany that could be extended to the discussion in Korea. OLG Hamm in NW, Germany decided the following case: The defendant took from the magazine shelf of a supermarket a “Playboy” for 5 EUR and went to the self-service checkout. He scanned but not the one found on the “Playboy” bar code, but kept the previously torn out of the newspaper “WAZ” bar code, which he had done in his wallet with him at the reader. The self checkout computer then threw out the price of a “WAZ” for 1.20 EUR, which the defendant paid. Then he left with the “Playboy” the business. AG und LG have recognized the defendant’s act as a computer Fraud, but OLG Hamm has seen it as a theft. In this paper, I introduce the main contents of the doctrine and case law relating to the discussion of the computer fraud and theft in Germany and summarize what kinds of implications for Korea the German discussion has.

Abstract

This paper deals with the problem of distinguishing between theft and computer fraud surrounding the self-checkout from the point of view of criminal law. The subject of this paper is especially focused on discussion relating to computer fraud (“Computerbetrug”) in Germany that could be extended to the discussion in Korea. OLG Hamm in NW, Germany decided the following case: The defendant took from the magazine shelf of a supermarket a “Playboy” for 5 EUR and went to the self-service checkout. He scanned but not the one found on the “Playboy” bar code, but kept the previously torn out of the newspaper “WAZ” bar code, which he had done in his wallet with him at the reader. The self checkout computer then threw out the price of a “WAZ” for 1.20 EUR, which the defendant paid. Then he left with the “Playboy” the business. AG und LG have recognized the defendant’s act as a computer Fraud, but OLG Hamm has seen it as a theft. In this paper, I introduce the main contents of the doctrine and case law relating to the discussion of the computer fraud and theft in Germany and summarize what kinds of implications for Korea the German discussion has.

참고문헌 (19)

  1. Fahl, Christian, "„Kassenschmuggel” an Selbstbedienungskassen", NStZ, pp.244~ (2014)
  2. Fahl, Christian, "Zwischenprüfungsklausur-Strafrecht: Variationen eines Diebstahls", JuS, pp.885~ (2004)
  3. Jäger, Christian, "Unerhrliche Kassenbedienung des Täters ist Fremdund nicht Selbstschädigung des Opfers", JA, pp.155~ (2014)
  4. Kindhäuser, Urs, "Nomos Kommentar Strafgesetzbuch" (2013), Baden-Baden
  5. Kühl, Kristian, "Strafgesetzbuch Kommentar" (2014), München
  6. "OLG Hamm, NStZ 2014, S. 275f.=BeckRS 2013, 16642", ~ (2014)
  7. Rönnau, Thomas, "Grundwissen-Strafrecht: Der Irrtum beim Betrug", JuS, pp.504~ (2014)
  8. Schönke, Adolf, "Strafgesetzbuch Kommentar" (2014), München
  9. Von Heintschel-Heinegg, Bernd, "Beck’scher Online-Kommentar StGB" (2013), München
  10. 이재상, "형법각론" (2013), 박영사
  11. 임웅, "형법각론" (2013), 법문사
  12. 배종대, "형법각론" (2010), 홍문사
  13. 오영근, "형법각론" (2009), 박영사
  14. 김성돈, "형법각론" (2009), 성균관대학교출판부
  15. 정영일, "형법각론" (2008), 박영사
  16. 정성근, "형법각론" (2008), 율곡출판사
  17. 박상기, "형법각론(제7판)" (2008), 박영사
  18. 손동권, "형법각론" (2005), 율곡출판사
  19. 이정훈, "컴퓨터 등 사용사기죄" (2006), 한국학술정보

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)