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

No person shall borrow or lend, or store, deliver or distribute, any access medium with the knowledge that it is intended to be used for a crime or intended to be used for a crime.

The Defendant sent a physical card.

“To lend a loan by raising credit rating by setting up a trading performance on the face of the State” send a physical card, which is an access medium, to the nameless person.

It was known that if an account linked to the card was investigated as a case used for the commission of the phishing fraud, and received a disposition on December 27, 2017 on suspicion of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (insufficient evidence) and then delivered its access medium to another person, the access medium would be used for the commission of the phishing fraud.

Nevertheless, on January 2018, the Defendant sent a soft card to the Defendant, who was in a false name or influorial name that misrepresented him/her to borrow a low interest rate from a person who misrepresented him/her to do so.

different types.

“Around January 24, 2018, at “C” located in Ischeon-si B where the Defendant was working, the Defendant sent a physical card, which is an access medium to the SC Bank Account (D) under the name of the Defendant, to his name in the name of Kwikset service, and informed him of the account number and password.

Accordingly, the defendant, knowing that he will be used in the crime, sent the access media to a nameless person.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Details of transfer, and submission of warrant materials (SC bank) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 49 (4) 2 and Article 6 (3) 3 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act concerning the facts constituting a crime, the selection of punishment for an optional sentence, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant, with the reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, was subject to a disposition of non-prosecution without suspicion, even though he was investigated by committing a similar crime.