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

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

Punishment of the crime

No person shall borrow or lend a means of access while demanding and promising compensation.

Nevertheless, around April 17, 2018, the Defendant sent 10 million won loans to the Defendant’s house located in Ssung-si B, and according to the proposal of the name infinites who misrepresente the employees of the financial company, the Defendant sent cream cards to the account to repay the principal and interest of the loan. The Defendant sent cream cards connected to the new cooperation account (C) in the name of the Defendant in accordance with the proposal of the name infinites who misrepresente the employees of the financial company.

As a result, the Defendant promised to provide a means of access in return for an intangible expectation interest that can receive future loans, and lent it to a person who has not been named.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. The details of withdrawals, the details of conversations, the details of transactions in and out of deposits, the details of entry and departure transactions (A);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (complication of contents of DNA dialogue);

1. Relevant Article 49(4)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and Articles 6(3)2 and 6(3)2 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The crime of lending the means of access under the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, such as this case’s reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, is a serious crime, and its social harm is a serious crime.

Furthermore, the means of access lent by the defendant was actually used for the crime of Bosing, which is more likely to be subject to criticism.

Before committing the instant crime, the Defendant had already been subject to suspension of indictment due to the suspicion of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and had not been aware of the punishment of a fine due to the crime of fraud aiding and abetting the criminal act. In addition, the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he was punished.

Comprehensively taking into account these circumstances: