Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

In using and managing a means of access, no one shall lend the means of access while receiving, demanding or promising any compensation, unless otherwise specifically provided for in any other Act.

On August 22, 2019, the Defendant heard that “on the face of sending a physical card, the Defendant would make the content of income and pass a loan review, and then would lend KRW 5 million to the Defendant.” On August 23, 2019, the Defendant issued one physical card connected to the D Account under the name of the Defendant in Daegu-gu B and C via Kwikset Service Articles, and notified the password of the said account via Kwikset Service.

As a result, the Defendant promised to provide a means of access in return for an intangible expected profit to receive future loans, and lent it to a person who is named in bad faith.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the remittance of the amount of damage, Kakakao dialogue, and financial information reply;

1. Relevant Article 49(4)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and Articles 6(3)2 and 6(3)2 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of fines;

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is likely to seriously affect society by not only impairing the safety and reliability of electronic financial transactions, but also creating a large number of victims by abusing the means of access, such as financial fraud, etc.

In fact, the means of access that the defendant lent was used for financial fraud crimes.

Considering these circumstances, it is true that there is a need for strict punishment against the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant is recognized to commit the crime, the fact that the victim's suspension of payment seems not to cause actual damage, and there is no criminal record that the defendant has been punished.