A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

No person shall, in using and managing a means of access, borrow or lend a means of access while demanding, demanding or promising to provide means of access.

Nevertheless, around March 4, 2019, the Defendant: (a) agreed to have a personal check lent the personal check to a person in unsound name and receive money from the person in unsound name; (b) around 11:00 on March 6, 2019, the Defendant sent one physical card connected to the Defendant’s personal account under the name C (E) by using Kwikset Services to the person in unsound name.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Report on internal investigation (the result of execution of a warrant of seizure and identification applicable to a financial account);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on deposit;

1. Relevant Article 49(4)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and Articles 6(3)2 and 6(3)2 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act lending the means of electronic financial transactions while promising compensation is that it would undermine the security and reliability of electronic financial transactions and that the means of access may be abused for other crimes, such as singinging fraud, and thus, requires strict punishment. The Defendant had the record of having been punished in 2013 as the act of transferring the means of access, and the possibility that the account in the judgment would have been aware of the possibility of being used for singinging crimes even in light of the dialogue with the person in default on name. As above, the lending of the means of access appears to have been unfavorable to the Defendant. The fact that the victim of actual fraud has occurred by the lending of the means of access, and that the Defendant was committed at the time of committing the crime, and that the Defendant’s transfer of