The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. No person charged may transfer or acquire a means of access in using and managing the means of access;

Nevertheless, on November 201, 2014, the Defendant transferred a notice letter "C's high-income Alba" to the above in the Internet next car page (C), and around December 13:20, 2014, the Defendant transferred a copy of the Defendant's corporate bank (E) and e-mail card to the above in the Internet via Kwikset service, which is the means of electronic financial transactions in the inside city of Gyeonggi-do.

2. Determination

A. The term “transfer” of the means of access under Article 49(4)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act means a fixed transfer of the ownership or the right to dispose of the means of access on the basis of the transferor’s intention, and it is reasonable to deem that the act of leasing the means of access or delegating the right

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do14913, Feb. 9, 2012). (B)

The Defendant asserts that he did not transfer a Kakao card. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant lent the Kakao card. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, ① the Defendant’s dialogueed between the person “New Consultation F” (hereinafter “person without a name”) and the Kakaox, the name-free person requested the Defendant to lend the passbook from the beginning, and even thereafter, the conversation was made on the premise that the lending was continued, and the word “transfer” was not mentioned. ② The name-free person talks with the Defendant that “the person without a name sent the passbook to the Kakaox.” The Defendant sent a message on the premise that the account was suspended and that “the person without a name-free person would recover the Kakao card” was “the person without a name-free person,” and the Defendant also stated in the police investigation process.