2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that all of the judgment of the crime is recognized and reflected, and there is no previous conviction exceeding the fine.

However, in light of the size of personal information illegally acquired and sold by the Defendant and the social harm caused by the instant crime, etc., it is difficult to view that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) there is a need to punish the Defendant heavier punishment; (b) there is no special change of circumstances after the lower judgment was pronounced; (c) equity in sentencing with the same similar case; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sex conduct, environment, family relationship, and other circumstances that constitute the conditions for sentencing as indicated in

Therefore, we do not accept the above argument of the defendant's above sentencing.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 70 subparag. 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is obvious that the Defendant’s appeal is a clerical error in Article 70 subparag. 2 of the Personal Information Protection Act on the ground that Article 70 subparag. 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is obvious that it is a clerical error in Article 70 subparag. 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that Article