A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

No person shall, in using and managing a means of access used in electronic financial transactions, borrow or lend a means of access while receiving, demanding or promising any compensation therefor.

Nevertheless, on November 2018, 2018, the Defendant received a proposal from the Skwicingman to the effect that “If the Defendant borrowed the Skwicing’s account, he will use it for 3 to 7 days and pay 3 to 400,000 won in return.” On November 26, 2018, the Defendant sent one check card connected to the Defendant’s name to the B Association (C) account under the name of the Defendant to the Swicingman through Kwicing’s article on Kwicing Services.

Accordingly, the Defendant promised to receive compensation and lent the means of access.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Admission details and application of Acts and subordinate statutes on financial transaction information;

1. Article 49(4)2 and Article 6(3)2 of the former Electronic Financial Transactions Act (amended by Act No. 17297 of May 19, 202), the pertinent provision on criminal facts, and the choice of imprisonment with labor

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of recommendation [decision of types] according to the sentencing guidelines for offenses in violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act [Type 1] general criminal field [the scope of recommendation field and recommendation range] basic field, and April to October of imprisonment;

2. The Defendant, as indicated in its reasoning, lent a check to the Defendant, in accordance with the proposal of a person under no name, who wants to give money when he/she lends an account for tax treatment.

In 2012, the defendant, in order to obtain a loan from around 2012, had the head of the Tong, and the defendant again committed a similar crime despite the enemy who was subject to the suspension of indictment.

Considering the fact that the means of access leased by the accused can be used for a very large amount of social harm, such as scam, etc., the responsibility of the accused for the instant crime is heavy.

However, the Defendant committed the instant crime.