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

No person shall, while promising to make any consideration, borrow or lend a means of access used in electronic financial transactions.

Nevertheless, on November 1, 2018, the Defendant received a proposal from the person who was the largest employee of the lending company at a non-resident location at Suwon-si (hereinafter referred to as Suwon-si) to provide a loan to 3.2% of the 3.2% of the total amount of the 3.2% of the Defendant’s name, on the same day, the Defendant sent the e-mail card connected to the c bank account (D) in the name of the Defendant in front of Seo-gu, Gwangju-si (hereinafter referred to as “Seoul-si”).

As a result, the Defendant promised to execute a loan in the future and lent the means of access for electronic financial transactions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. E statements;

1. Application of the specification of transactions-related 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 selection of fines;

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

1. The crime of this case on the ground of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act with regard to the provisional payment order is not that of lending the means of access by the defendant, but that of the means of access leased by the defendant, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant in that the means of access was used for telephone financial fraud crimes.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant has no record of being punished in excess of a fine, and other various circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and result of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined.