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

On February 2, 2017, the Defendant received a proposal to the effect that “The Defendant would pay a fee of KRW 500,000 won per opening, if he/she lends a corporate account,” from an unqualified person who had contacted through the Internet gambling site.

Accordingly, the Defendant around that time, at the Daejeon Dong-dong, received KRW 4 million a sum of KRW 1 million per month in return for the transfer of means of access, such as passbook and physical card, connected to the account under the name of Cbank (D) in the name of the Defendant, and the F account in the name of E Co., Ltd. (G).

Accordingly, the Defendant received compensation and lent the means of access to electronic financial transactions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol against H and I;

1. Statement to J police officers;

1. Investigation report (including attachment of a warrant of seizure and reply data, attachment of attached data), investigation report (including attachment of a non-prosecution decision on suspicion of offering the F account in the name of the E), attachment report (including a decision on attachment), investigation report (including attachment of a copy of the F Account in the name of the E), part of attachment);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to entire registered matters;

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. It is disadvantageous that the crime was committed with knowledge that the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act was illegal, and the actual payment was received.

The punishment shall be determined in consideration of the defendant's reflectivity, the degree of consideration, the absence of the same criminal power, and other sentencing factors of Article 51 of the Criminal Act.