2. It is recognized that the crime of lending an access medium, such as the instant case, can be abused for a crime such as Bosing, etc. in that the access medium can be abused for such a crime. The fact that the access medium leased by the Defendant was actually used for the crime of licensing, and that the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime.

However, it is also recognized that the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects, and that there is no profit from the crime of this case, and that there is no economic reason to cause the crime of this case.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the lower court after the judgment of the lower court, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unfeasible 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 appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.