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

No one shall transfer a means of access, such as a user number, an electronic card or any other similar information registered with a financial company, etc. used to issue a transaction request in electronic financial transactions or to secure the authenticity and accuracy of the user and the transaction details, or lend such means of access, such as a password necessary for the use thereof, request or promise to receive any consideration therefor.

On November 1, 2018, the Defendant received a proposal from the single-name B team leader who became aware of the mobile phone advertising text through the telephone to offer KRW 4 million per 1 week e-mail card if he/she lends the account and e-mail card in the name of the Defendant to be used in connection with the tax evasion of C Co., Ltd. by telephone, and then notified the two bank account numbers (E, F) and two passwords established in the name of the Defendant to the above B.

On November 1, 2018, the Defendant continued to deliver two copies of the DNA bank e-mail card linked to each of the above accounts to the sender from the cell phone store located in G on November 1, 2018.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A copy of the details of transactions by account, the details of transactions by account, the advanced revised supplementary table, the details of entry and withdrawal transactions, and the details of transactions by DNA banks under the name of the defendant;

1. Application of the statutes governing H dialogues

1. Article 49 (4) 2 and Article 6 (3) 2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that electronic financial transactions lent to another person for the sentencing of the provisional payment order could cause damage to many and unspecified persons because they can be used for fraudulent crimes, such as singing, etc., and in fact, the account of the means of access lent by the defendant has been used for fraud.