Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Criminal facts

On September 19, 2019, the Defendant: (a) received a proposal from a person under whose name the Defendant misrepresented the personal lending business entity on the A.M.; (b) opened a B account in the name of the Defendant (C) with the consent of the said proposal to the effect that “I would proceed with the loan if I would open an account to repay the principal and interest of the loan; and (c) delivered a copy of the C Card linked to the said account to the Defendant’s dwelling in the name of the Defendant in the D apartment E at Kimhae-si, Kimhae-si, via Kwikset-based Articles.

As a result, the Defendant promised to lend the means of access in return for intangible expectation interest that can receive future loans.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning specification of transactions;

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. Judgment on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the claim is not to obtain a loan, but to pay interest after the loan execution, and thus, the means of access is not to be lent in return for consideration.

2. “Lending a means of access” under Article 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act means lending a means of access to a third party temporarily without managing or supervising the user of the means of access when receiving, demanding or promising the third party to receive or promise to receive compensation, and “price” refers to economic benefits in relation to the lending of the means of access.

(see Supreme Court Decision 2017Do16946, Jun. 27, 2019). The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, namely, the Defendant’s personal card, to the person in distress of name.