The Defendant appealed from the lower court on the ground that the lower court’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too heavy. The Prosecutor appealed from the lower court on the ground that the lower court’s punishment is too minor.

2. The crime of Bophishing fraud is committed against many unspecified victims in a systematic and planned manner, and the social harm resulting therefrom is serious and thus, it is necessary to strictly punish them.

The criminal liability of the defendant is more important than the content of the defendant's act, the degree of contribution to the crime and the amount of fraud.

Until now, damage has not been recovered.

The above is the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant.

However, the Defendant led to confession and reflect on the instant crime.

The economic benefits directly acquired by the defendant are not greater than the amount of fraud.

The defendant does not seem to have participated in the phishing crime with a conclusive intention.

Under the career of foreign crime, the defendant is the first offender.

The above is the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

In light of the aforementioned circumstances, comprehensively taking into account the circumstances that led to the Defendant to commit the crime, the age, health condition, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant case, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.