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

In using and managing a means of access, no one shall borrow or lend a means of access, or keep, deliver or distribute a means of access, in receiving, demanding or promising compensation, unless otherwise expressly provided for in any other Act.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, on July 1019, borrowed KRW 2 million from a person who could not know the name misrepresenting “B Company C” from a person who was unable to know the name, without collateral, at 3% interest. However, the Defendant consented to the proposal that “the withdrawal of loan interest and the request to send the physical card,” and then, on the 10th day of the same month, sent a letter of the physical card connected to the E account in the name of the Defendant to the Kwikset service engineer sent by a person who could not know the above name, and notified the password by telephone.

As a result, the Defendant promised to receive a future loan in return for the intangible expected interest, and lent a means of access for electronic financial transactions to a person who is not aware of his name.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written complaint of G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a warrant of search, seizure, and verification;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground of the sentencing of the provisional payment order is as follows: (a) it is necessary to strictly eradicate the lending of the means of access, such as the instant case, because it is highly likely to be abused for crimes that have great social harm, such as tax evasion, gambling, telephone financial fraud, etc.

In fact, the means of access that the defendant lent was used to commit fraud, causing damage.

However, the defendant's mistake is divided, and the defendant has not been punished for the same kind of power.

In addition, various sentencings shown in the arguments of this case, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after crimes.