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

On September 17, 2017, the Defendant, at the front of the building B in Changwon-si, received a demand from his name in return for the purport that “I would give KRW 1,200,000,000 to the account for three days on the face of lending a debit card” from his name in return for the Defendant’s failure to obtain tax reduction or exemption. The Defendant, on the part of the building B in front of the building B in Changwon-si, operated an act of lending the access medium through a one-time debit card connected to the account (C) of the Defendant’s name in return for the payment by notifying the password of the above account by telephone.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the specifications of transfer, written application for the transaction of Suhyup, and account statement;

1. Article 49 of the Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 49 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions through which punishment is selected (excluding punishment); Article 6 (3) 2 of the same Act (excluding punishment);

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. In a situation where the criminal procedure of the provisional payment order, which has caused serious harm to our society due to the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, continues to take place, lending without permission a medium of access used for electronic financial transactions to a person who is unable to identify the defendant for the purpose of acquiring illegal profits, is not a good crime.

Since the access media leased by the defendant is also used as a means of phishing crimes, the result of the crime is not somewhat weak.

Moreover, the Defendant was not aware of having been sentenced to punishment for other crimes, and committed the instant crime within the period of repeated crime, and was committed during the period of suspended sentence of imprisonment for other crimes. However, the Defendant is in profoundly against the mistake.

It seems that the Defendant also lent the access media that he lent to the Defendant, without being aware that the media would be used for serious crimes such as Bosing.