The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

No. 2 of the seized evidence.

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant was aware of the fact as his duties of receiving loans, and did not know that he was a phishing crime.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, even though the Defendant was found to have committed a fraudulent act against the Victim AK as to the facts charged.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

Judgment

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

In this Court, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the indictment with respect to the second clause of the facts charged as follows, and the subject of the judgment was changed by this Court's permission.

Around August 18, 2016, the fact that around August 18, 2016, had no intention or ability to make a substitute loan at a low interest rate, and calls to the victim P for “E Bank Loan Counseling Co., Ltd., Q Q., which uses a high interest rate as a government policy support, is a good to substitute the obligations of the ordinary people using a high interest rate at a low interest rate.

If information is entered by accessing the site of the Korea Asset Management Corporation, the Korea Asset Management Corporation shall provide a debt guarantee.

Since high interest rate loans are subject to the number of loans, the AT Savings Bank will receive loans.

“Falsely speaking, the member allowed the victim to enter the financial information of the victim, such as an official certificate, by accessing the fake Korea Asset Management Corporation website, and allowed the victim to file an application for a loan with AT Savings Bank. On the 24th day of the same month, upon deposit of a loan of KRW 17 million with E bank account in the victim’s name, the victim’s financial information acquired as above through Internet banking through the information processing device without authority and transferred the said KRW 17 million to R’s bank account in the victim’s name.

The lower court found the changed subject matter and the remaining guilty.