1. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of eight months.

2. Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of four months.

(b).

Punishment of the crime

Where a bank opens an account in the name of a corporation and such account is used for a crime such as Bosing, etc., the bank may be liable for damage pursuant to the Electronic Financial Transactions Act depending on negligence. Since it is necessary to carry out an additional business, such as suspension of payment of accounts and registration of criminal use accounts, etc., it is important matters to confirm whether the relevant corporation is a normal corporation, and whether the relevant account is used for normal financial transaction purposes.

1. On December 2016, Defendant A presented a proposal that “I would give a day to the opening of a bankbook in the name of the juristic person” from a person without the name of the head of the bank (the name of the bank), etc., and prepared a false statement of purpose of financial transaction, which was introduced to prevent the opening of a one-person passbook, by visiting the bank in the city, while carrying a certificate of personal seal impression provided by the said juristic person, etc., and visiting the bank in the city, which was completely irrelevant to the Defendant, and submitting it to the bank as if it were true, to open the bank’s account in the name of the relevant juristic person, and to deliver it to the said person with the issuance of an access medium, such as the head of the bank, etc.

On December 8, 2016, the defendant, in collusion with the above name-free boxes, etc., received an order to open an account under the name of the above corporation from the above name-free boxes, etc. at a national bank branch of Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and applied for the opening of an account under the name of D when entering the above national bank branch of the above national bank, and applied for the opening of an account under the name of D. In fact, when the defendant opened an account under the name of D, the defendant was the only corporation to open an account under the name of D, and the defendant was thought to immediately deliver the above name-free boxes, etc., and the defendant did not work for D.