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

In using and managing the means of access, no one may borrow or lend the means of access while receiving, demanding or promising any compensation, unless otherwise specifically provided for in any other Act.

Nevertheless, around September 25, 2019, the Defendant received a proposal from a person who was unaware of his name to the effect that he “is a liquor company, and will borrow 300,000 won at one time for the purpose of tax reduction and exemption.” On September 27, 2019, the Defendant sent one check card connected to the E-bank account (F) in the name-based Seoul Daegu Metropolitan City Association Office located in Nam-gu, Daegu Metropolitan City Office, and sent Kwikset service articles that sent the name-based winners to the article of Kwikkset Service, and sent the password to the article of Kwikset Service, which was kept by the Defendant, by sending one check card connected to the E-bank account (F) in the name-based Seoul Metropolitan City D.

As a result, the Defendant promised to pay for, lent the means of access used in electronic financial transactions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes related to the provision of financial transaction information, such as each police statement to G, financial transaction of the principal;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)2 of the former Electronic Financial Transactions Act (amended by Act No. 17297, May 19, 202) concerning criminal facts;

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

1. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, lending of the means of access for electronic financial transactions may impair the security and reliability of electronic financial transactions and be used as a means of other crimes. Thus, the crime is not good, and the fact that the means of access leased by the defendant was actually used for the fraud crime is unfavorable.

However, the defendant confessions the crime of this case and repents the mistake, and the defendant pays 4 million won to the defrauded and does not want the punishment of the victim by agreement, and the defendant does not want to do so.