전자금융거래법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The judgment of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is unreasonable because the punishment (3 million won in penalty) of the court below is too unfilled.
2. The judgment is based on the following facts: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the offense; and (b) the Defendant has no record of punishment other than twice before and after the fine was imposed; and (c) the Defendant was aware of the fact that it was highly likely to use the Defendant’s account and access medium for illegal purposes because it could not be known that the Defendant would have arrived at anyone; (b) the Defendant’s access medium was leading to the instant offense; and (c) the Defendant’s lending medium was used
The Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, on the ground that the lower court’s punishment is reasonable, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, career, family relation, economic situation, background and motive leading up to the commission of an offense; (b) circumstances after the commission of an offense; and (c) other matters regarding the sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments on changes
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 appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.