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

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

Punishment of the crime

In using and managing a means of access, no one shall borrow or lend the means of access while receiving, demanding or promising any compensation, unless otherwise specifically provided for in any other Act.

Nevertheless, on June 15, 2019, the Defendant sent a means of access, such as physical cards and passwords, connected to the D (E) account in the name of the Defendant at the C office located in the Seoul office located in the Jeonbuk-gun, 2019, to the above person under the name of the Defendant, on June 5, 2019, to the effect that, “The Defendant would have difficulty in obtaining the loan by stating the record of the transaction and raising the performance of the loan, but it is possible to conduct loan transactions, and if he sent the check card under the name of the party because it is possible to do so, he will have the transaction performance accumulated up to 20 million won.”

Accordingly, the defendant committed an intangible profit to receive a loan, and lent the means of access.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. The authenticity and statement of the F;

1. Application of data on the details of transfer (D-A) and the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the return of G financial transaction information;

1. Article 49(4)2 of the pertinent Act regarding criminal facts, Articles 6(3)2 and 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act regarding the selection of fines (the term “price” under Article 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act refers to the economic benefits that correspond to the lending of the means of access, and such economic benefits refer to the economic benefits that correspond to the lending of the means of access, such as cash, and include intangible economic benefits, including the opportunity to receive a loan in a situation where it is difficult to obtain a loan normally (see Supreme Court Decision 2017Do16946, Jun. 27, 2019). According to each of the evidence stated in the above “a summary of evidence” in the instant case, the Defendant, who is difficult to obtain a loan, promised to obtain a “price,” which is an intangible benefit, and thus, the means of access, such as a physical card, etc., to a name-oriented person.