However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On June 12, 2015, the defendant was prosecuted due to the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act in around 2015, and was sentenced to a non-prosecution disposition by the Sung-nam branch office of the Suwon District Public Prosecutor's Office, and was aware that the act of inducing the transfer of the access media by the person without name is false and that the transfer of the access media shall not be made.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, on April 27, 2017, up to 17:00 on the front day of the Yansan-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City on April 27, 2017, “The Defendant has set up a loan from a cell phone in front of the Yan-gu C.

At least three days after sending the head of the Tong, etc., the employees who have directly exchanged with the party and the head of the national bank team will get off and carded to the former.

“ even though it was sufficiently aware that the proposal was not a proposal of a person without a name, “The cash card, which is an access medium connected to the account (D) of one’s own name, was sent to Kwikset Service and transferred the access medium.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Copy of the protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the accused;

1. E’s authenticity and written statements;

1. Each statement of financial transaction information, such as a detailed statement of account transactions;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning non-prosecution decisions;

1. Article 49 (4) 1 and Article 6 (3) 1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act concerning the crime, the selection of punishment for the selective punishment, Articles 49 (4) 1 and 6 (3) 1 of the same Act, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion and determination of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da14

1. The gist of the assertion is consistent with the fact that the Defendant delivered the access media, but as long as it is merely merely a temporary transfer for the purpose of obtaining a loan, it cannot be deemed as a “transfer” inasmuch as it does not definitely transfer the disposal right.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, namely, the Defendant’s account in his/her name to obtain a loan at the former Jinjin Police Station on March 27, 2015.