The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and eight months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment of the court below on the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act

A. Article 49(4)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act punishs the act of transferring or taking over a means of access in violation of Article 6(3)1. If it is nothing more than entrusting the temporary use of the means of access, such as the provision of a deposit passbook, cash card and password, by deceiving that the means of access will be harmed, etc., such provision does not constitute “transfer” of the means of access as referred to in Article 6(3)1.

Whether the delivery of a means of access is merely a mere delegation of the temporary use of the means of access or the transfer thereof shall be determined on an individual basis of specific cases, comprehensively taking into account relevant circumstances, such as the motive and background leading up to the delivery of the means of access, relationship with the recipient, number of the means of access to which the means of access has been delivered, behavior or circumstances after the delivery, and whether there was an agreement on the subject, amount, interest rate, and method of receiving the means of access

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do12789 Decided May 24, 2012). B.

According to the evidence adopted by the court below, the following facts are recognized:

Although it is recognized that the Defendant did not specifically specify the time or method of collecting the personal check from a person who has no one-off form to a person who has no one-off form, the Defendant has consistently stated that he/she issued a personal check to the effect that he/she would pay the price upon paying the sexual check. In light of the following facts, the Defendant’s statement is trust in considerable part, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone exceeds delegation of the temporary use of the personal check.