The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant temporarily transferred the access media for the loan, but in light of the developments leading up to the delivery, etc., the Defendant had the intention of transfer in dunese transfer.

Since the defendant's act constitutes "transfer of access media" under Article 6 (3) 1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (main facts charged), the defendant's act is not so.

Even if "price" under Article 6 (3) 2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act refers to all forms of monetary contribution, and thus the opportunity for a defendant to obtain a loan or loan from a person in a name in the name is included in the above consideration, and at least the defendant's act constitutes "loan of access media while receiving, receiving, or promising a consideration" under Article 6 (3) 2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act (affirmative). Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby acquitted all the primary facts charged and the ancillary facts charged.

2. Determination

A. A summary of the facts charged 1) No person charged may transfer access media used for electronic financial transactions to another person except as otherwise provided for in other Acts.

Nevertheless, around January 23, 2015, the Defendant transferred the cash card and the corresponding password to the bank account (Account Number C) of the name of the Defendant to a person who is unable to know his name through Kwikwikset Service article at the front of the entrance of the subway at the Seocheon-gu Seoul, Seoul, Seoul, the Seoul, the Seoul, a subway station, at the entrance of Kwikset Service.

2) Unless otherwise specifically provided for in other Acts, no person charged with preliminary charges shall either lend or lend any access medium or distribute any access medium while demanding, demanding or promising the consideration.

Nevertheless, there is a need to do so.