2. The crime of transferring an access medium, such as the instant case, is highly likely to be abused for another serious crime by impairing the stability and reliability of electronic financial transactions, and is recognized that the financial account, etc. actually transferred by the Defendant has been abused for another crime. Meanwhile, the Defendant recognized the facts charged and reflects his mistake. Meanwhile, the Defendant is the primary offender without any previous conviction; the Defendant immediately requested payment suspension to a financial institution; and the Defendant appears to have not caused actual damage due to the instant crime by requesting payment suspension to the financial institution; and the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the instant crime were considered, and thus, it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too unjustifiable and unfair. Accordingly, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.