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

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

Punishment of the crime

On August 30, 2018, the Defendant: (a) obtained a proposal from an Buddhist person who misrepresented himself/herself as a lending business operator to “to provide loans; (b) to request the payment of principal and interest; and (c) accepted the proposal; (d) opened the Agricultural Cooperative Account (B) in the name of the Defendant on August 30, 2018; and (e) sent a physical card card connected to the said account from the D office located in Sung-gu, Sung-gu, Sung-si, Chang-si, Chang-si, to the above Buddhist person via a house, and notified the password by telephone.

As a result, the Defendant promised to pay for the intangible expected interest of future loans and lent the means of access to the accused.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A written petition;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the details of remittance and transactions of bankbooks;

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 sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds of the provisional payment order is based on a comprehensive consideration of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, the contents and circumstances of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, as set forth in the order.

The act of lending means of access is not only detrimental to the safety and reliability of electronic financial transactions, but also it is necessary to strictly cope with the risk of massing a large number of victims because it is used for other crimes.

The means of access leased by the accused was actually used for the fraud crime.

A favorable circumstance: The Defendant recognized the instant crime and did not repeat the same mistake.

It was restored to the victim due to the suspension of payment of the amount of Bosing damage.

Defendant has no record of criminal punishment in the past.