As to the crimes of No. 1, No. 2-A, and No. 2-B of the judgment of the defendant.

2. We examine the judgment, and the defendant started to commit the crime of violation of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act while being sentenced to the suspended execution due to the violation of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act during the suspended execution period, and committed some of the crimes of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act during the suspended execution period. The defendant's crime of violation of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act and the Electronic Financial Transactions Act are highly likely to disrupt the order of foreign exchange transactions and be abused for the purpose of raising funds and washing criminal proceeds, such as gambling, evasion of taxes, and Bosing, etc. Therefore, it is highly necessary to strictly punish the crime and prevent its recurrence. In light of the above circumstances, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant to the sentence, considering that the number of the exchange exchange in this case reaches 30,239 times in total and exceeds 38.5 billion won, and the amount of the exchange in this case is considerably large.

However, in determining the punishment, the court below’s punishment is somewhat unreasonable, considering various sentencing conditions stated in the records and arguments of this case, such as the fact that the defendant had no criminal record, the defendant was aware of all the crimes of this case in the court below, and the social perception of the illegality of the unregistered money exchange business via virtual currency was not clearly formed at the time of committing the crime of violating the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, and the defendant’s perception was highly likely to be identical.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is with merit, and it is again decided as follows.

[Re-use]