Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 2.5 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

In using and managing a means of access, no one shall engage in any act of lending any means of access while receiving, demanding or promising to receive compensation, unless otherwise expressly provided for in other Acts.

Nevertheless, on February 12, 2019, the Defendant would offer a loan to the Defendant if he sent a e-mail card so that he can pay interest of KRW 15 million from a person who has no name.

“On the 13th day of the same month, at around 11:39, the Defendant’s house located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu, the physical card, which is a means of access connected to the Defendant’s name (D) in the vicinity of the Defendant’s house, was delivered to the person in poor name through Kwikset Service Articles.

As a result, the Defendant promised to provide a means of access in return for an intangible expectation interest that can receive future loans, and lent it to a person who has not been named.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of replys (C Bank);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 49 (4) 2 and 6 (3) 2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The conduct of lending the means of access to electronic financial transactions on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is highly likely to cause secondary damage, such as fraud, by opening an account connected to another person for use in another crime, and such social harm is high.

In fact, the means of access that the Defendant lent was used in telecommunications-based financial fraud, such as remittance and withdrawal of approximately KRW 6 million to the connected account.

However, there are circumstances to consider that the number of means of access leased by the Defendant is limited to one, and that the Defendant lent the means of access to a false statement that the Defendant would make a loan, and it is difficult to view that the means of access was known that the means of access would be used for fraud, etc. in light of the content of conversation with the person under whose name the means of access (Evidence 52 to 80 pages

There is no profit earned by the defendant from the crime of this case.