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 June 24, 2019, the Defendant heard the phrase “a request to send a physical card so that 4 million won (per 2% interest per month) may be withdrawn from the Defendant’s bank account under the name of the Defendant,” and on June 24, 2019, on June 24, 2019, through Kwikset Service Articles, one check card connected to the Defendant’s new bank account under the name of the Defendant in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, and informed the Defendant of the password’s password via Kwikset Service Articles.

As a result, the suspect provided the means of access in return for the intangible expected profit of receiving future loans.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the contents of Kakao Stockholm conversation, such as wage certificates for typ exchange, output of the main sentence of e-mail, customer CIF, account transaction details, application form for crow card transaction, etc.;

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 defendant responded to the demand for provision for reasons of the loan, etc. that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and said that he would not repeat again.