If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

With respect to the use and management of a means of access, no one shall borrow or lend a means of access, or keep, deliver or distribute a means of access, in exchange for compensation, demand or promise, unless otherwise expressly provided for in any other Act.

Nevertheless, on September 2019, the Defendant received a proposal stating that “When sending a physical card, the Defendant will create the transaction details of the account and increase the credit rating by raising the transaction details of the account” from a person who assumes a false name of B Bank C’s agent. The same year.

9. From 13:00 on the 26th 13:00, at Changwon-si, he sent a physical card linked to the two bank accounts (E) in the name of the Defendant to Kwikset service articles.

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to contribute to the intangible benefit of receiving a loan and lent the means of access.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written confirmations of results of electronic financial transfer and replies by financial institutions;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act regarding selective punishment, and the choice of a fine (such as: (a) the fact that there is no profit acquired by the defendant; (b) the fact that there is no profit gained by the defendant; and (c) the fact that there is no power to

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendant and defense counsel’s assertion - The Defendant was able to lend the means of access in this case at the time of lending.

- The mere obtaining of an opportunity to obtain a loan in a situation that is not in a normal situation that makes it difficult to obtain a loan can not be said to be in a quid pro quo relationship with the lending of the means of access.

- Ultimately, in the instant case, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have given the means of access in return for an intangible benefit to obtain a loan.

2. Determination - the relevant laws and regulations.