A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On March 11, 2019, the Defendant: (a) sent the name infreshing the C team leader of the lending company B, who was under contact with and was under contact with a lending advertisement message on or around March 11, 2019; and (b) sent the account number, a copy of the passbook, etc. to make the transaction details available to obtain a loan from the lending company C team operator with low credit rating so that he/she can become a credit rating available.

In other words, upon the deposit of money, the Defendant received a proposal that “the withdrawal and delivery of the money to the employee”, and the Defendant transferred the e-bank card and password connected to the D bank account under the Defendant’s name to obtain a loan on January 2018, 2018, and was subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment due to a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act after using the e-mail card, etc. in the e-mailing crime, and being investigated. In order to obtain the loan, the Defendant received the proposal and received the proposal, despite sufficiently doubt that he could participate in the e-banking crime in case of informing the account number in his name to obtain the loan or delivering the e-bank card connected thereto, and received the money deposited in the Defendant’s account in accordance with the direction of the e-bank under the name of the Defendant and received the money by withdrawing the money.

On May 2019, the name Buddhistist called the victim G by telephoneing the victim G and misrepresenting him/her to the H bank, and submitting an application after setting up a fluor in order to enable a refund loan, and he/she made a false statement that "the existing loan in the J bank was paid by telephone directly, and the payment for loss of benefit due to the due date occurred."

However, in fact, the above person was not an employee of H bank, and there was no intention or ability to provide loans to the victim.

Nevertheless, as above, a person who is not aware of his name is deceiving the victim, and such person is a bank in the name of the defendant around 13:14 of May 7, 2019 and around 13:16 of the victim.