The non-guilty part is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Central District Court.

1. As to Defendant A’s violation of each electronic financial transaction by taking over the means of access

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is that Defendant A acquired three means of access, such as a passbook, password, and cash card in the name of Company A from the Z on July 25, 2012. ② On August 29, 2012, Defendant A acquired six means of access, such as agricultural bank passbook, cash card, and password, in the name of Z, from the Z on August 29, 2012.

B. The lower court acquitted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there is insufficient evidence that Defendant A directly acquired the means of access from the nominal owner and there is no evidence to prove that Z had been in a position to transfer the said means of access ownership or right to dispose of the said means of access.

C. However, the lower court’s determination is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

According to the evidence duly admitted by the court below, Defendant A, etc.: (a) placed an office in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Seoul with Defendant B, etc. and recruited and sold a passbook in the name of an individual and corporation; (b) the Z had a passbook, password, and cash card of each account holder opened by using a business operator registration document, etc. with Defendant A prior to several years; (c) upon contact with each other, Defendant A met or delivered it, and received KRW 2.50,000 per one passbook; (d) Defendant A kept the above passbook, etc. from Z on the same day; and (e) on July 25, 2012, upon request of Defendant A, Defendant A sent three means of access, such as the passbook, password, cash card, etc., under the name of Kwikset service; (e) borrowed the passbook, etc., under the name of A, including Kwikset Bank; and (e) used the account in the above account or the account in cash within 3,000 won per one passbook.