The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

Suwon District Prosecutors' Office 2014Mo187.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the act of taking over a means of access subject to punishment under Article 49(4)1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act refers to a definitive transfer of the ownership or right to dispose of the means of access based on the transferor’s intent. In this case, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the account holder has finally transferred the means of access to the instant case to a person who was not aware of

Even if the account holder confirmedly transferred the means of access to the instant case to a person who was unaware of his/her name.

Even if the crime of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act was committed by acquiring an electronic access medium from the name holder, the Defendant’s act of withdrawing cash by receiving an electronic access medium from the name holder is merely an ex post facto participation in the crime, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant’s solicitation was made.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles regarding "acquisition" or "public offering" under the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is that no one acquires the means of access for electronic financial transactions in using and managing the means of access, except as otherwise expressly provided for in other Acts. Nevertheless, on January 2, 2014, the Defendant consented with the Chinese Call Financial Fraud Association (one name “Ssing and withdrawing the money deposited in the account in which the Cash Card is reduced,” with the intention of “the withdrawal of the money deposited in the account in which the Cash Card is reduced,” which was presented by the Defendant around January 2, 2014.

The defendant.