2. Even though the circumstances are recognized, such as the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime and reflects his mistake, and that there was no record of punishment in the Republic of Korea except once the family protective disposition was issued due to assault, etc., this seems to have been already considered in the sentencing of the lower court.

In addition, the instant crime was committed in collusion with B, etc. by the Defendant sold illegal conviction cards opened in the name of another person to foreigners. In light of the method and content of the crime, etc., the crime was not committed; the Defendant actively participated in the instant crime by advertising the sale of illegal conviction cards through F, etc.; the illegal conviction cards sold by the Defendant amount to 49 persons; and the act of selling and distributing illegal conviction cards is highly likely to be abused for other crimes, and there is a need to punish the offender. In full view of the circumstances, such as equity of sentencing and sentencing between the same and similar cases of the Defendant, and other various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant argument, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence, etc., the punishment of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.