A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Except as otherwise expressly provided for in any other Act, no one shall lend any access medium used to issue a transaction instruction in electronic financial transactions or to use and manage any access medium used to secure the authenticity and accuracy of users and the details of such transaction to any third person.

Nevertheless, on December 2017, the Defendant sent a cash card connected to the account from a person who assumes the position of a lending company in an influenite (hereinafter referred to as "Seocheon-si") in an influence area.

“To give a loan on the face of the State” was presented and agreed to accept it.

On December 20, 2017, the Defendant lent a cash card connected to the national bank account (D) under the name of the Defendant to the third party through Kwikset Service Officer, at around 18:00 on December 20, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written petition;

1. A certificate of transfer confirmation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on financial transaction replies;

1. Article 49 of the Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense, Article 49 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and Article 49 (4) 2 and Article 6 (3) 2 of the same Act, the selection of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. The act of lending a medium of access to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as the following sentencing grounds) is highly likely to be used for other crimes, such as tax evasion and Bosing. In fact, the access media leased by the Defendant was used for fraud. Furthermore, the Defendant committed the instant crime even if he was investigated by the police as the same criminal facts before the instant case, and thereby, committed the instant crime again.

However, there are many kinds of sentencing shown in the arguments of this case, such as the fact that the defendant acknowledges and reflects the mistake, the fact that there is no more severe penalty than the fine, and the defendant's age, sex, family environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.