2. In light of the fact that the Defendant made confessions of all the instant crimes and reflects on the nature of the Defendant, and the period, frequency, contents, etc. of the instant crime, the role of the Defendant did not play a leading role as sharing the act of execution according to the direction of the principal offender, the Defendant’s profits derived from the instant crime are not significant, and the Defendant has no record of being punished for the same crime as the instant case, etc., are favorable to the Defendant.

However, as in the crime of this case, the so-called scaming crime committed on a planned and systematic basis against many unspecified persons, such as the crime of this case, is composed of a large number of victims, and most of the principal offenders reside overseas, so it is not easy to arrest them, and it is not easy to recover from damage. It is highly necessary to strictly punish accomplices who act in Korea as the defendant, and the amount of the fraud of this case reaches 300 million won in total. The defendant collected 17 bankbooks and cash cards in collusion with accomplices, and withdrawn 68 million won out of the amount of the fraud, and thereby play an essential and important role in the crime of this case. In full view of the motive for the crime of this case, character and conduct of the defendant, environment, family relationship, etc., the defendant's punishment against the defendant is too unreasonable. Thus, 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.