2. The act of improper lending of access media, such as this case, requires strict attention in that it facilitates phishing fraud with serious social harm.

However, in full view of all the circumstances in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, occupation, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unfeasible and unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (Provided, That the part of "the pertinent Article of the law concerning criminal facts" in the application of the law of the court below is "Article 49 (4) 2 and Article 6 (3) 2 (elel) of the pertinent Act concerning criminal facts.

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Punishments stipulated in the crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act due to the lending of passbook from a corporate bank account with heavy criminal situation) (elel to reduce);

1. The selection of a punishment (elel to reduce) type of punishment is "ex officio correction is made, and each of the crimes of this case was indicted for a simple single crime, but this court has, as a result of the examination in this court, in an ordinary concurrent relationship;

Recognizing that it is recognized (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1530, Mar. 25, 2010) (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1530, Mar. 25, 2010). Even if it is recognized as a commercial concurrent relationship with the same criminal facts, it is merely limited to a different legal evaluation as to the number of crimes, and it is not a fact that is different from the facts charged, nor a concern about actual disadvantage to the defendant's exercise of his/her right of defense does not violate the principle