A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal records] On September 23, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor by the Daegu District Court on May 18, 2017, and completed the execution of the sentence in the racing prison on May 18, 2017. On August 31, 2018, the Daegu District Court sentenced one year of imprisonment with prison labor and a fine of KRW 500,000, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 2, 2018.

[Criminal facts] No person may transfer a medium access to electronic financial transactions.

From B known to the society around December 28, 2017, the Defendant: “The need to use the money in Korea, the loaner’s maturity limit on the money borrowed prior to the opening of the account is delayed, and the credit rating is high by creating the transaction performance level.

“On the same day, at the point of the locking room of the D Bank in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the head of the Tong and the official stamp, etc. connected to the D Bank Account in the name of the representative director of the D Bank in the name of the D Bank Account in the name of the D Bank Account in the name of the corporation in which B was known to the person in whose name the B was not known, and notified the password.

Accordingly, the Defendant transferred the electronic financial transaction access media to another person.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application for new transactions and business registration certificate;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and statutes requiring recognition;

1. The applicable provision of Article 49 (4) 1 and Article 6 (3) 1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, but Article 39(1) of the Act on the Handling of Concurrent Crimes, on the grounds that the Defendant established a floating corporation and opened an account in the name of the corporation and transferred its access media, thereby undermining the transparency of financial transactions and impairing the financial order. In addition, the crime of this case is not good in that the above account is very malicious to society, such as its actual use for the crime of Bosing, etc., and the Defendant committed the crime of this case without referring to the period of repeated offense.