In this case, the defendants are both domestic first offenders, and the direct interest acquired by the crime of this case seems to exist, and the defendant B is a juvenile.

However, the instant case is a case in which the Defendants either withdrawn or attempted to withdraw the amount of damage using the means of access used in the so-called Bophishing crime. Although the period of participation is shorter, the number of times and the amount of damage involved in the fraudulent act is not smaller than the number of times and the amount of damage, and the degree of the Defendants’ participation as a whole as a withdrawal of the entire Bophishing organization

The circumstances where it is difficult to arrest the entire organization or to recover the amount of fraud due to the nature of the Bosing crime committed in the form of the occupied organization, the adverse effect of the Bosing crime on the whole society should also be considered.

In addition, there is no recovery from damage up to the trial.

As in the instant case, the term “institutional fraud (the amount less than 100 million won)” that committed a systematic and professional crime by sharing roles among many people in advance is set forth in the sentencing guidelines as the basic area of imprisonment with prison labor for a minimum of one year and six months and three years, and it can be deemed that there is an aggravated element of punishment as a case involving an unspecified or large number of victims. In this case, multiple crimes of the same kind and different types of crimes in the relationship of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act are committed.

In full view of all such circumstances and various circumstances as the motive of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendants’ age, career, character and conduct, family environment, etc., and the sentencing conditions as shown in the pleadings, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendants.