If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

No person shall, in using and managing the means of access used in electronic financial transactions, lend the means of access knowing that it is intended to use it for a crime or is to be used for a crime unless otherwise specifically provided for in other Acts.

During the Defendant’s personal name-based counseling service, the Defendant told that “I would open a Mapp Spppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp

Accordingly, the Defendant knowingly lent the means of access used in electronic financial transactions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A deposit certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning transaction details in A’s B accounts (C);

1. Relevant Article 49 (4) 2 and Article 6 (3) 3 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act concerning criminal facts; selection of fines;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the provisional payment order is that the defendant again lends the means of access even though he/she had a record of being punished for the same crime.

However, the Defendant’s mistake is against the Defendant, and when the Defendant’s account was deposited, the victim would have been able to receive a return of the amount of damage as a result of the Defendant’s request for suspension of payment immediately after contact with the bank, taking into account the following circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime.