The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles): (a) the Defendant issued the instant account number, password, and a certificate of official approval for the loan “other than this case”; (b) the name under whose name the Defendant received the OTP identification number from the Defendant may transfer the account using the password without managing and supervising the Defendant; and (c) thus, constitutes an act of lending an access medium, the payment of which was promised to be prohibited by the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

2. Determination

A. When maintaining the facts charged against the violation of the former Electronic Financial Transactions Act at the time of the trial, the application of the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality as “helping and abetting the violation of the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality” and “Article 6(1) and Article 3(3) of the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality,” and Article 32(1) of the Criminal Act as stated in the following facts charged were applied to the amendment of the Act. Since the court permitted the amendment of the Act, it is judged on the grounds for appeal against the original facts charged and the facts charged alternatively added at the trial of the court.

B. Determination of the grounds for appeal as to the original facts charged (violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act) 1) The lower court, on the basis of the fact that: (a) lending of an access medium to another person temporarily using an access medium without managing and supervising the user of the access medium (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do8957, Aug. 18, 2017) while receiving, demanding, or promising to receive, the “loan of the access medium” under Article 6(3) Subparag. 2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act; and (b) there is room to view that the Defendant’s disclosure of the password of the official stamp’s name to a non-person as part of the means to obtain the loan.