전자금융거래법위반
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
Except as otherwise expressly provided for in any other Act, no person shall lend any means of using or managing an access medium with a promise to receive, demand or promise the consideration.
On July 1, 2019, the Defendant: (a) received letters related to loans from a person without a name-based address; and (b) sent a post-paid card from the Defendant to “be able to open a Maspbook; and (c) to raise credit rating through entry and withdrawal.
(g) When a head of Maspbook is opened, it shall be returned;
“Around July 3, 2019, at a three-type post office located in 180, for the purpose of viewing the horses, issued a physical card connected to the bank account B (C) under the name of the Defendant to the name in the name in the door, and notified the password in the text message.
As a result, the Defendant promised to return the intangible expected interest to receive future loans in return for the future and lent the access media to the name influence.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on bank response data in the police statement B to D;
1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and Article 49 (4) 2 and Article 6 (3) 2 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions through which the punishment is chosen (or choice of imprisonment);
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;
1. The sentence shall be determined as per the Disposition, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the offender’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. and the conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the fact that the offender was punished as a fine for the same kind of crime for the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act and repeatedly commits the same mistake; (b) there was no record of punishment exceeding the fine; and (c) reflects the opposite circumstances