A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four 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, the Defendant, at around 12:00 on January 23, 2019, proposed that he would pay 3 million won in return for the lending of the check from a person who was named in the name of the Defendant prior to Skwikseter B, in response to the proposal, “I will pay 3 million won in return for the lending of the check because the check is necessary to reduce taxes.”

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to provide compensation and lent the means of access.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of D;

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. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. Scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with labor for one month to three years;

2. The scope of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of types] the scope of offenses in violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act [Type 1] and the absence of general crimes [the scope of recommendations and recommendations] [the scope of recommendations and recommendations] and the basic area of punishment, April 1 to October.

3. Determination of sentence: The act of lending the means of access to electronic financial transactions for four months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence is an act of providing the means of access to other crimes, such as showing, pressing, etc., and the other crimes normally cause large damage to a large number of victims, and thus, the risk is very large.

Although the Defendant was aware that he borrowed a physical card in a liquor company to reduce taxes, even in such a case, it is clear that he would be used for an illegal act.

Moreover, the Defendant had already violated the Electronic Financial Transactions Act on December 17, 2014.