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

No person shall lend a means of access used in an electronic financial transaction while receiving, demanding or promising any consideration therefor.

Nevertheless, around April 5, 2018, the Defendant received a proposal from a person without his name, stating that “When sending a physical card, the Defendant will create a transaction performance and loan 15 million won as an exclusive loan for employees. To return the physical card after making the transaction performance.” The Defendant accepted it. During the period of Ansan, the Defendant lent the means of access to the financial institution by using a d bank account in the name of the Defendant to the non-existent male who sent the name in front of the convenience store in the Gu, and then lent the means of access to the d bank account in the name of the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Investigation reports (Analysis of details of transactions of criminal records);

1. Details of transfer transactions and certificates of deposit transaction;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

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

1. The circumstances in which the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order are favorable: The reason for sentencing is recognized to be erroneous, and the fact that there is no history of punishment for the same kind of crime: The lending of the means of access is not only detrimental to the stability of electronic financial transactions and trust, but also providing the means of other crimes, such as Bosping, etc., and social harm is serious, and the means of access actually lent by the defendant is used for other crimes