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

On September 24, 2019, the Defendant received a proposal from a nameless beneficiary to grant a face-to-face loan, and accepted it, and then lent one check-to-face loan to a nameless beneficiary via a bank account (Account Number: D) in the name of the Defendant.

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to provide compensation and lent the means of access.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement E prepared by the police;

1. Application of statutes on the details of entry into and withdrawal from the account of a single bank;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)2 of the former Electronic Financial Transactions Act (amended by Act No. 17297, May 19, 202) concerning criminal facts;

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 ground of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Act on Provisional Payment Order is the offense that is likely to abuse the means of access to another second offense and thus cause many and unspecified victims to gather. In fact, even in the instant case, the means of access leased by the Defendant was used for the crime of fraud

However, it can be considered as a favorable sentencing factor, such as the fact that the defendant acknowledges the crime of this case, has no record of criminal punishment, and there is no benefit from the crime of this case.

In addition, the punishment against the defendant shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the factors of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the motive and background leading up to the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime of this case, degree of recognition of illegality, age and character of the defendant, criminal records