2. The judgment is based on the following: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the crime; (b) the Defendant was discovered before the instant access medium was used for the crime and was not used for the actual crime; (c) the Defendant has no record of punishment exceeding the fine; (d) the transfer of the electronic financial transaction access medium to another person can cause damage to the unspecified majority because it can be used for the crime; and (e) the need to punish the transfer of the access medium, such as the instant case, for eradicating the sing crime, etc., is an unfavorable sentencing reason.

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.