However, on April 9, 2014, the Defendant transferred the means of access to the Agricultural Cooperative D Account from the Defendant’s home located in Daegu-gun District Co., Ltd. to the needy.

2. Determination

A. Article 49(4)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act prohibits an act of “transfer” or “acquisition” in violation of Article 6(3)1 of the said Act. The term “transfer” of the means of access subject to punishment pursuant to the said provision means a definitive transfer of the right to own or dispose of access media to another person and does not include delegation for free lending or temporary use.

B. As to the instant case, the Defendant heard from the prosecutor’s investigation to the present court that he would make a transaction of stocks through the Defendant’s passbook, informed the Defendant of the passbook, cash card and password, and reported the loss of the means of access to the financial institution immediately since he did not return the passbook on the one day he/she would receive the passbook. Accordingly, if so alleged, the Defendant can be deemed to have delegated the lending company to temporarily use each of the means of access because he/she did not have any intention to transfer the means of access, and it cannot be deemed to have transferred the same. According to evidence, the Defendant sent four telephone conversations and one text message on April 8, 2014, which was the date before the instant case, to the lender, the telephone number and EF, and the first text message on April 9, 2014, and the telephone number on the day of the instant case: 1:37:25,137:4:5,17:27:57, 27:47:57, 2014.