2. It is recognized that the Defendant made a confession of the instant crime, his mistake is divided, and the Defendant’s health is not good.

However, the crime of this case is not very good that the defendant was involved in the so-called phishing crime; the defendant committed the crime of this case again even though he had the same kind of criminal record at several times; the majority of the victims and the amount of damage is considerable; the defendant's participation does not reach recovery or agreement up to the trial; the degree of the defendant's participation is considerably significant; the balance of sentencing with the criminal defendant and the same kind of crime; the defendant's age, sex and environment; the motive, means and consequence of the crime; and the conditions of various sentencing specified in the arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, are not recognized to be too unreasonable. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the part of the list of crimes in the “U,” and Articles 7 through 8 of the judgment below is obvious that it is a clerical error, and the judgment of the court below is deleted under Article 25(1) of the Rules on the Criminal Procedure and is corrected as it is