전화금융사기(Voice Phishing) 지급인 보호를 위한 금융법적 개선안 검토

서지정보

ㆍ발행기관 : 은행법학회 ㆍ수록지정보 : 은행법연구 / 3권 / 2호
ㆍ저자명 : 김수희, 한영찬

목차

Ⅰ. 문제 제기
Ⅱ. 전화금융사기 자금이체의 법률관계
1. 일반 자금이체의 법률관계
2. 전화금융사기 자금이체의 법률관계
3. 지급인의 부당이득반환청구권에 대한 실현위험
Ⅲ. 현행법상 구제 절차
1. 사기자금 지급정지제도
2. 법률구조공단의 구제 절차
3. 문제점
Ⅳ. 피해자 보호를 위한 법적 개선 방안
1. 사기자금 지급정지제도의 법적 근거 강화
2. 지급인의 부당이득반환청구권 실현 위험의제거
3. 지급인 구제 절차의 개선
4. 소결
Ⅴ. 결론

한국어 초록

Voice Phishing is a crime committed by impersonating public organizations, financial
institutions, investigative agency or friend, and requesting money transfer or financial
information over the telephone. Voice Phishing victims order money transfer to their bank and
actually transfer the money to paper account by fraudulent action. In such case, what are the
legal measures for the victim to receive back the money and with certain measures are victims
sufficiently protected?
In such case where the victim has ordered money transfer by fraudulent action, there is in
need for the victim to receive the money back. Currently there are two measures, one is relief
procedure provided by Korea Legal Aid Corporation and the other is 'fraud payment
suspension'. The victim after realizing that the call was a fraud, the victim orders financial
institution to suspend payment and eventually sues the receiver on unjust enrichment. However
this measure shows limits on protecting the victim because of complex lawsuit procedures and
risk of actual money return despite of payment suspension.
On the thesis, we studied on substantial and procedural improvements on the matter. First,
considering that current payment suspension does not have legal basis, we propose to insert
“fraud payment suspension” clause to the article. Furthermore current regulation has to be
modified in a way that receiver’s bank can directly return the money to payer when provided
with receiver’s acceptance. Second, in a real world, Voice Phishing victims face difficulties
receiving their money back because of receiver’s creditors. Certain risks have to be eliminated.
Unless the money is withdrawn, payer ought to have priority over the money in receiver’s
account. Third, current relief program that mandates lawsuit has to be modified. Instead of
mandating lawsuit, the victim should be able to receive the money only by discharge of
receivables.
Voice Phishing victims often abandon relief procedures due to excessive time, effort and
cost. Thus Voice Phishing criminals are more tempted to abuse current system. We wish that the study is useful to make more systematic and reasonable relief measures for the victims of
Voice Phishing.

영어 초록

Voice Phishing is a crime committed by impersonating public organizations, financialinstitutions, investigative agency or friend, and requesting money transfer or financialinformation over the telephone. Voice Phishing victims order money transfer to their bank andactually transfer the money to paper account by fraudulent action. In such case, what are thelegal measures for the victim to receive back the money and with certain measures are victimssufficiently protected?In such case where the victim has ordered money transfer by fraudulent action, there is inneed for the victim to receive the money back. Currently there are two measures, one is reliefprocedure provided by Korea Legal Aid Corporation and the other is 'fraud paymentsuspension'. The victim after realizing that the call was a fraud, the victim orders financialinstitution to suspend payment and eventually sues the receiver on unjust enrichment. Howeverthis measure shows limits on protecting the victim because of complex lawsuit procedures andrisk of actual money return despite of payment suspension.On the thesis, we studied on substantial and procedural improvements on the matter. First,considering that current payment suspension does not have legal basis, we propose to insert“fraud payment suspension” clause to the article. Furthermore current regulation has to bemodified in a way that receiver’s bank can directly return the money to payer when providedwith receiver’s acceptance. Second, in a real world, Voice Phishing victims face difficultiesreceiving their money back because of receiver’s creditors. Certain risks have to be eliminated.Unless the money is withdrawn, payer ought to have priority over the money in receiver’saccount. Third, current relief program that mandates lawsuit has to be modified. Instead ofmandating lawsuit, the victim should be able to receive the money only by discharge ofreceivables.Voice Phishing victims often abandon relief procedures due to excessive time, effort andcost. Thus Voice Phishing criminals are more tempted to abuse current system. We wish that the study is useful to make more systematic and reasonable relief measures for the victims ofVoice Phishing.

참고 자료

없음