2. The lower court determined that the act of lending the means of access is not only detrimental to the security and reliability of electronic financial transactions, but also requires strict measures as it is highly likely to raise the risk of massing a large number of victims. The means of access leased by the Defendant is actually used for the crime of fraud, the Defendant’s investigation into the same crime in 2011 and had the record of being suspended from indictment. Considering the favorable circumstances, the lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account all sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime.

Even when considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal, the lower court appears to have determined the punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding sentencing, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the Defendant is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.