2. The crime of this case where the Defendant transferred an access medium for consideration is an act that facilitates various criminal acts, such as the so-called “scaming,” using another’s access medium, and the nature of the crime is very poor in view of the social harm. The Defendant reported an advertisement to the effect that the head of the passbook is calculated, and first contacted the transferee of the passbook, thereby leading to each of the crimes of this case, and the Defendant transferred the access medium over several occasions, etc. that are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects the Defendant; (b) the history of domestic punishment is not confirmed; and (c) the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances, circumstances after the commission of the crime; and (d) various sentencing conditions specified in the instant argument, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 40, Article 50 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is apparent that the omission of “Article 40, Article 50 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the 1. Formal Crimes” between the second and third acts in the application column of the law among the judgment below is made, and therefore, it is corrected to add it ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on