2. The fact that the judgment is contrary to the defendant's approval for committing the crime of this case, the fact that the profit gained by committing the crime of this case seems to have not been significant, the fact that it appears to have resulted in this case due to living conditions, and that it is necessary to consider equity with the case where the judgment was rendered simultaneously with the case where the judgment became final and conclusive.

In addition to the previous case of the defendant, there are many different types of criminal records to the defendant, the site operated by the defendant is large, and the defendant made and operated a commercial sex advertising site specialized for profit-making purposes without any adult authentication procedure, and the defendant made and operated a commercial sex advertising site specialized for profit-making purposes and distributed obscene materials disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and other factors, including the motive, means, and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.