The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., both types of punishment) by the lower court is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.

2. Ex officio determination 1) Determination 1) If a person who committed a false accusation in violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act makes a confession before the judgment or disciplinary action on the reported case becomes final and conclusive, the punishment shall be mitigated or exempted (Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act). In the first prosecutor’s investigation and in the court of original instance, the Defendant led the Defendant to a confession as to the non-prosecution of the facts charged in the instant case in accordance with Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act. If so, the lower court erred by omitting the sentence necessary to reduce or exempt the Defendant pursuant to Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the lower court’s judgment is no longer maintained. (2) In addition, if the means of access are transferred in violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, one crime is established for each means of access. However, the act of transferring multiple means of access at once constitutes a single act and each crime constitutes a mutually competitive relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1530).

Since the Defendant lent two physical cards in return for the promise, each of the above crimes of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act exists in a mutually competitive relationship. Nevertheless, the lower court determined that each of the crimes of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act was one of the crimes of violation of the said Act. Since the lower court erred by omitting the application of Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act on the commercial concurrence, the lower judgment was no longer maintained in this respect.

3. In conclusion, there is a ground for ex officio destruction of the judgment of the court below and the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and each of the above crimes of assault among the judgment below.