However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

In using and managing the means of access, no one shall transfer or acquire the means of access or promise to receive compensation unless otherwise specifically provided for in other Acts, nor shall he/she lend or receive the means of access.

Nevertheless, if the Defendant borrowed an overseas sports business entity’s funds management account from his name-free business entity, the Defendant leased the means of access to the account and thought to acquire cash. On January 14, 2019, the Defendant sent a physical card connected to the name-free business entity’s Cbank’s account (Account Number D) to the Defendant’s name-free business entity, and sent a password to E message, in a way that it gives the delivery to the name-free Kwikset service provider in front of Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on January 14, 2019.

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to borrow a means of access used in electronic financial transactions to receive compensation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of the transaction transfer certificate, the financial transaction information of a Cbank, and the Efagrative photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

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 choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act is that the act of transferring the means of access is serious as a result of facilitating a crime, such as tax evasion and singishing fraud, and in fact, the means of access in the name of the accused has been used only for the crime of fraud, and the accused has already been punished by a fine twice for the same crime, so there is room to deem that the accused requires more severe punishment.

However, the defendant's mistake is recognized and against the defendant, and the motive and circumstances of the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime are committed, and other factors.