A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Of May 2019, the Defendant: (a) received text messages from a name-free person who assumes himself/herself as an employee of a non-credit company B, and asked the name-free person who was named as “the credit level is so good that it would have refused to grant a loan from several lending companies; (b) the same person would also be possible to do so; and (c) from the above name-free person, the above name-free person is too small that the amount of loan could be available due to lack of transaction performance; (d) there is a need for a work to increase the lending limit by increasing transaction performance; (b) the Defendant’s transaction performance is required to have extended; (c) the Defendant’s name bank number (D) and password, with his/her consent thereto; and (d) the Defendant’s name-free person was notified of the above name-free person.

On the other hand, on May 22, 2019, the non-member of the Bosing Organization related to the above person under whose name the victim E made a false statement that the victim E “to lend an existing loan at a low interest rate if he/she redeems the existing loan to the account known to him/her,” and then, on May 28, 2019, the victim got the victim to remit the amount of nine million won to the above Cbank account under the name of the defendant around 10:52.

The Defendant did not accurately identify the information about the company’s information or the person in charge of the lending, and given an explanation that it made false transaction records for lending, it could sufficiently be recognized that it is not a normal loan. The Defendant transferred a means of access connected to one’s own account and had the record of being investigated by the investigative agency, which was used in the relevant account for Bophishing crime. However, the Defendant was ordered to make a false statement to the effect that he would receive money from his relative upon being asked by his employee when withdrawing cash from the bank counter to being asked about the reasons for withdrawal. As such, the Defendant sent the cash to the person in charge of false statement to the effect that he would receive money from his relative.