Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

No one shall borrow or lend a means of access, or keep, deliver or distribute a means of access, in receiving, demanding or promising any compensation for the use and management of the means of access.

Nevertheless, on July 16, 2018, the Defendant was urged to “400,000 won if he would lend the account,” and agreed to receive money from the person under whose name the Defendant borrowed the check to the person under whose name the account was not opened, and then, at around 02:00 of the same day, sent one check card connected with the Defendant’s name to the person under whose name the account was opened by using Kwikset Service.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement of F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N,O, P, Q, and R;

1. Each written confirmation of transfer;

1. Requests for cooperation in investigation (request for provision ofCCTV image data) and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reports (portable telephone text attached);

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 selection of fines;

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

1. The act of lending the means of access with the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is highly likely to be used for crimes such as scam, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant committed the instant crime in accordance with the interests of the Defendant.

However, his mistake is recognized and reflected.

There is no criminal record against the defendant.

The Defendant received KRW 400,00 in return for lending the account, and withdrawn the amount of damage deposited into the account and delivered it to the person who lent the account. However, the Defendant applied for a payment suspension prior to that, but the other party knew of the fact and made intimidation to deliver the amount of damage including the part of the amount received by the Defendant (Investigation Record 214-219 pages).