2. We examine the judgment and the defendant's arguments together.

The crime of this case is a so-called "phishing," which is organized and planned against many and unspecified persons, and is a very bad, and the crime is likely to cause more difficult circumstances by taking advantage of the fluorial wifes into consideration the economic and social weak as a major crime. In addition, the crime of this case is highly harmful to each individual victim in addition to property damage, such as causing confusion and uncertainty in the financial transaction order and undermining the trust of the whole society.

In addition, since the Criminal Code has become more intelligent, the scope of damage has been expanded in a non-discriminatory manner, and the damage has a structural characteristic that is not easy to recover, it is necessary to strictly punish persons who have participated in the crime in order to eradicate it.

Furthermore, the Defendant had been subject to suspension of indictment due to the crime of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act even before, and is likely to be subject to criticism in light of the circumstances of the crime, by taking part in the instant crime even though he was aware of the crime.

These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the circumstances are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognizes his mistake and reflects it, the fact that the victim L and T have agreed to pay the amount of damage to the victim L and T, the fact that there is no criminal record except once a fine due to drinking driving, and the fact that there is a family member to support.

In addition, various circumstances, including the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances after committing a crime, which are conditions for sentencing as shown in the argument of this case.