전자금융거래법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged was around December 2008, the Defendant transferred a corporate bank passbook (Account Number D) and a cash card, opened in the name of the Defendant to the Buddhist person called "C" in the name of the Defendant.
Accordingly, the Defendant transferred the means of access for electronic financial transactions.
2. The term “transfer of the means of access for electronic financial transactions” under the former Electronic Financial Transactions Act (amended by Act No. 9325 of Dec. 31, 2008) does not include the mere lending of, or temporary use of, the means of access.
(see Supreme Court Decision 201Do16167, Jul. 5, 2012). As to whether the Defendant transferred the ownership or right to dispose of the means of access, such as passbook, to another person as indicated in the facts charged, health room, the Defendant’s protocol of interrogation of the police by the Defendant denies its content, and thus, it is not admissible. The remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize
3. According to the conclusion, the facts charged against the defendant constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure