2. The Defendant’s phishing crime, which aided and aided by the judgment, is planned and organized against many unspecified persons, and is provoking a large number of victims, and the nature of the crime is not very good, and the social harm therefrom is so serious that it is necessary to prevent, and thus, severe punishment is needed. The amount of damage caused by each of the instant crimes is not large, and the victim E is likely to suffer a severe pain, and the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes even though he/she was sentenced to the suspension of indictment in 2013 due to transfer of bank accounts, etc. under his/her name.

However, the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of each of the crimes of this case, and the Defendant seems not to have aiding and abetting each of the crimes of this case with a conclusive intention from the beginning, appears to have never existed the benefits acquired by the Defendant through each of the crimes of this case, and the victim C seems to be able to recover the damage due to the refund of the amount of damage, etc., and the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment prior to the instant case, etc. are favorable circumstances.

In addition to the above circumstances, considering the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, its means and consequence, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and theories on changes, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed unfair and unfair.

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