2. It is recognized that the defendant's judgment is divided into and against his own crime, and there is no benefit acquired by the crime of this case, the defendant has no record of punishment for the same crime, and there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding a fine since 2011.

However, since the lending of the means of access may lead to a very large other crime, such as Bosing, etc., it is necessary to strictly punish the lending, in fact, it is used to receive KRW 3 million out of the amount of the means of access that the Defendant lent as the crime in this case to F in the Bosing phishing fraud with respect to F, and in full view of the Defendant’s age, character, character, environment and other sentencing conditions, it cannot be said that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

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

[However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the second “the pertinent Article of the Act on 1. Criminal Crimes” in the written judgment of the court below shall be amended to “the pertinent Article of the Act on 1. Criminal Crimes and the Selection of Punishment for the Crime,” and Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act shall be amended to “Article 49(4)2 and Article 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act,” respectively.