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

In using and managing the means of access to electronic financial transactions, no one shall borrow or lend a means of access or store, deliver or distribute a means of access with the knowledge that such means are to be used for a crime or to be used for a crime, unless otherwise provided for in any other Act.

Nevertheless, around October 29, 2018, the Defendant issued a proposal to the effect that “B’s agent is able to lend a loan” from a person who assumes a false name, who assumes the “B’s agent”, and if the password is notified, the Defendant will put the loan into an account connected to the C Card, and collect a monthly interest.”

On April 18, 2011, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million by the Daejeon District Court due to a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act. Accordingly, the Defendant was aware of, or was aware of the fact that the act of lending the e-mail card would be used for committing the act of telephone financial fraud, etc., the act of lending the e-mail card. On October 30, 2018, the Defendant issued a copy of the e-mail card connected to the e-mail bank account in the name of the Defendant in the vicinity of the Incheon Seo-gu Incheon Seo-gu E-gu E-mail Co., Ltd., through Kwikset Service Articles and sent a password.

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to receive compensation and lent the means of access to electronic financial transactions while knowing that they will be used for crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of H;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the details of transactions, F Card issuance, and F Bank Transactions;

1. Article 49 (4) 2, Article 6 (3) 2, and Article 6 (3) 3 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act concerning facts constituting an offense (the lending of a means of access based on the promise of consideration and awareness of the use of a crime);

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

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is based on the order of provisional payment.