When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

No person shall lend a means of access in the course of receiving, demanding or promising any compensation.

Nevertheless, around October 31, 2018, the Defendant: (a) issued a proposal to the effect that “When sending a physical card, the Defendant would have borrowed KRW 3 million to a person in distress who assumes the name of the lending company’s staff; (b) the principal and interest would be withdrawn by using a physical card sent when being deposited in a deposit account connected with the above physical card; and (c) entered the password on the back of the physical card connected with the CF’s deposit account (D) in the name of the Defendant, and issued the said card to the person in distress via the selective distribution service.”

As a result, the Defendant promised to provide a means of access in return for an intangible expectation interest that can receive future loans, and lent it to a person who has not been named.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Data on warrant of search, seizure and verification;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the submission of trade agreements to victims;

1. Relevant Article 49(4)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and Articles 6(3)2 and 6(3)2 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The following grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act are the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant.

The Defendant’s act of lending the means of access to another person, like the instant crime, needs to be strictly punished inasmuch as it can be used as other means of crime, such as singishing.

In this case, the means of access lent by the defendant was used for the crime of Bophishing fraud, causing damage.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and reflects it, and that it is the first offender who had no record of punishment prior to the instant case is favorable.

In addition, various sentencings shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime, and circumstances after the crime.