A. Although the Defendant was not guilty of committing the instant facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby finding the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

B. The defendant guilty for an unfair sentencing

Even if the court below's sentence (700,000 won) imposed on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. According to the evidence adopted by the court below, such as the defendant led to the confession of the facts charged in this case in the court of original instance, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is sufficiently guilty. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is

B. Circumstances favorable to the unfair argument of sentencing: the defendant is the first offender.

The crime of this case is not only an act that disturbs the credibility of the safety performance of electronic financial transactions by itself, but also an access medium transferred by the defendant was used as a tool for the phishing crime, causing actual property damage.

Even before the crime of this case is committed, the defendant has already been subject to suspension of indictment for the same kind of crime.

The sentencing criteria are not set for a crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, including the above favorable circumstances, unfavorable circumstances, the Defendant’s age, character and behavior environment, the motive and means of crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., and all the kinds of sentencing conditions and the records.

In full view of the above, since it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable because the sentence imposed by the defendant is too large, there is no reason to believe that the sentencing of the defendant is unfair.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.