A. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant argument, including Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, social relationship, means and consequence, etc., the sentencing of the lower court was too heavy or unhulled so that the Defendant exceeded a reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, considering the following: (a) the fact that the access media transferred by the Defendant was used in the crime of telephone financing fraud and the damage therefrom was equivalent to KRW 2.85 million; (b) the fact that the Defendant also needs to make the transaction details in order to reduce the revenue cost of the company’s company; (c) the fact that the Defendant appears to have transferred the access medium at the end of the above telephone financial company’s criminal intent; (d) the Defendant appears to have no profit accrued from the instant crime; and (e) there was no record of having been sentenced to the criminal history of the same kind of crime or suspended execution or heavier punishment.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's argument are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.