2. The crime of this case is deemed to have been committed by the following circumstances: (a) in return for promising the Defendant to receive the price and lending the physical card connected to the account under the name of the Defendant; (b) in light of the content and method of the crime, the crime of lending or transfer of the means of access is inferior; (c) the lending or transfer of the means of access constitutes another secondary crime, such as Bosinging, etc.; and (d) there is a high risk of causing an unspecified number of victims to win-out; and (c) the Defendant’s lending of the means of access was actually used for the singishing crime; and (d) the Defendant’

In addition, considering the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime; (c) the Defendant has no criminal records; and (d) the victim of the instant crime appears to have recovered the money by deception; and (c) the equity in sentencing with the same and similar incidents; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the instant crime; and (e) the motive and circumstance of the instant crime; and (e) the consequence, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the lower

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.