전자금융거래법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below is unreasonable as it is too unfasible to the extent that the punishment (3 million won in penalty) imposed by the court below is too unfased.
2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence by taking into account all the conditions of sentencing indicated in the pleadings, such as the following factors: (a) the instant criminal act harms the safety and trust of financial transaction; (b) the Defendant’s transfer of passbook was used for the fraud crime; (c) the Defendant recognized the Defendant’s mistake and reflects it; and (d) the Defendant’s primary offender was the first offender; and (d) the sentence was rendered by taking into account the favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive
When the sentencing of the lower court’s judgment is fully taken into account in the first instance court, the lower court’s judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.
Inasmuch as there is no change in the conditions of sentencing that can be deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too uneasible.
Therefore, prosecutor's argument cannot be accepted.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit.