If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

No person shall lend any access medium with a promise to pay for the use and management of the access medium.

Nevertheless, on September 30, 2016, the Defendant sent a e-mail card from a person without his/her name to his/her name, and then repeatedly posted the results of the transaction and then borrowed the card.

“On the phone call to the effect that “,” sent a physical card connected to the post office account (Account Number C) in the name of the Defendant at a two-dimensional post office located on the 15-ro, Yangyang-si, Yangyang-si, Yangyang-si, both of which was sent to the party in whose name the card was in the name.

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to pay for the price and lent the approaching media.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the police and suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Each statement of D, E, F, G, H, and I;

1. Inquiry into the results of each transfer, the details of each Kakao Stockholm dialogue, the details of criminal suspect's submission of the Kakao Stockholm dialogue, and replies to a warrant of search and inspection;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (the confirmation of opening of an account, the transfer of case, the confirmation of opening of a receipt account, and the transfer of case);

1. Article 49 of the Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 49 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions through which punishment is selected (excluding punishment); Article 6 (3) 2 of the same Act (excluding punishment);

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument is that the Defendant transferred a physical card to a person without a name, as a means to obtain a loan from the Defendant’s transaction performance. This is only consistent with the Defendant’s interest, such as an increase in the Defendant’s transaction performance, and thus, it cannot be viewed as a “loan” and it cannot be viewed as a consideration for “loan” itself.

The defendant is only a person who has been accused of his name in order to engage in licensing.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances that the evidence of each judgment in its judgment can be identified, the Defendant’s judgment is rendered.