However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

No one shall lend the means of access in return for promising to receive compensation in using and managing access media.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, who became aware of the text message of mobile phone loan advertising, received a proposal from the person who was unaware of the name of the original site, and sent the physical card and password connected to the bank account opened in the name of the party, and then borrowed the card at that time. On September 16, 2019, the Defendant accepted the proposal, and then notified the personal number of the card in front of the “C hospital” located in the name of the Defendant in the name of the party. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25148, Sep. 16, 2019; Presidential Decree No. 25148, Sep. 16, 2019; Presidential Decree No. 25135, Feb. 2, 2016>

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to receive compensation and lent the means of access.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A copy of the statement of the police officer G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on dialogue data;

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 choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the act of lending the means of access, such as this case, is serious as the act of facilitating the crime such as tax evasion and fraud.

In fact, the means of access in the name of the defendant was used for the fraud, and the amount of damage was not much.

Although there are many records of criminal punishment and suspension of indictment for the same crime, the defendant again committed the crime of this case. Therefore, there is a high possibility of criticism against the defendant.

However, it appears that the defendant's wrong recognition and reflects, and some of the amount of fraud damage has been returned to the defrauded, considering the circumstances such as the background of the crime, the amount of damage related to the crime, the circumstances after the crime, the age, character and conduct of the defendant, and the circumstances of sentencing.