전자금융거래법위반등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
During the period from July 27, 2017 to July 22, 2019, the Defendant is in the state of having the ability to discern things or make decisions, such as the fact that he/she had been hospitalized in B Hospital with the symptoms of fluence and had the record of treatment, etc.
Except as otherwise provided for in any other Act, no person of "2019No one shall borrow or lend any means of access while receiving, demanding or promising to receive any consideration, demanding or promiseing to use or manage any electronic card used in electronic financial transactions and other means of access equivalent thereto, such as electronic information, certificates, passwords, etc.
Nevertheless, around July 8, 2019, the Defendant received a proposal from a person who is not infinite-gun located in the name of the Defendant, and consented to the loan from the person who is infinite-gun. On July 11, 2019, the Defendant sent one check card connected to the company bank account (C) in the name of the Defendant’s name to the person who is not infinite-gun.
As a result, the Defendant promised to pay for, lent the means of access used in electronic financial transactions.
A person under whose name the person under whose name the person under whose name the second name was 2019 Highest 6391, committed a crime of prompt phishing by misrepresenting the borrower, and the Defendant is a person who takes charge of the role of the term “passing” in which the Defendant withdraws and delivers the money damaged by fraud deposited in the account in the name of the principal by committing the crime under the direction of the person under whose name the second name the Defendant was in charge.
On November 2019, the Defendant issued a proposal that “The Defendant would make a loan of KRW 50 million in the face of delivering the money deposited in the name of the Party in lieu of the money deposited in the name of the Party” by telephone or Kakakao Stockholm message from the above person in the name of the Defendant, and then accepted the proposal, even though he was aware that the money deposited in the Defendant’s account was a fraud damage.”