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

In using and managing a means of access, no one shall lend the means of access while receiving, demanding or promising any compensation therefor.

Nevertheless, around June 15, 2019, the Defendant accepted a proposal from a nameless person who assumes a false representation in B Bank C to the effect that “When sending a physical card, the Defendant will have a loan executed after raising credit rating by making a false transaction performance.” On or around the 18th of the same month, the Defendant sent one physical card, which is a means of access connected to the D Association (E) account in the name of the Defendant, via Kwikset Service, and notified the password of the above account by telephone.

Accordingly, the defendant provided a means of access with the promise to receive an intangible expected profit to implement the loan.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on account transactions;

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. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be comprehensively considered to determine the sentence as ordered.

The favorable circumstances: The fact that the defendant recognized and reflected the crime; the same kind of crime does not exist; the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant's assertion that the means of access leased by the defendant was actually used for the crime of Bophishing, and there is no data to regard that the damage was completely recovered.