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

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

Punishment of the crime

Except as otherwise expressly provided for in other Acts, no person shall borrow or lend any access medium while receiving, demanding or promising to receive, demand or promise to use or manage the access medium.

Nevertheless, at around 18:30 on October 12, 2017, the Defendant promised to receive 3 million won in return for the loan of 4 e-mail cards from the person in non-name in return for 3 days from the person in charge of his/her name, and lent the access media by notifying Kwikset service article about 4 copies of the e-mail card, which are linked to the e-mail's service article, to receive 3 million won in return for the loan of 4 e-mail cards from the person in charge of his/her name.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the police statement protocol (including the details of counterpart electronic financial account attached thereto) to G;

1. Article 49 (4) 2 and Article 6 (3) 2 of the Act on Electronic Financial Transactions for the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Based on the grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the sentencing conditions specified in the trial process of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, family relation, family relationship, home environment, motive and means of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentence is determined as ordered.

The favorable circumstances: The crime of this case is not only the damage to the trust of electronic financial transactions, but also the damage to a large number of victims due to the use of the leased access media in criminal acts, such as telecommunications financing fraud, etc., the crime of this case is not good, and the damage has occurred due to the abuse of the access media lent by the defendant for criminal acts.