2. The so-called “singishing” fraud, such as the crime of this case, is serious harm to society as a whole, and since the role of society is subdivided and operated in the form of occupied organization as a result of each act of execution, it becomes a serious social problem now. Thus, even if only a part of the act of execution is performed, it is necessary to punish the offender. Of them, the physical card in the name of another person kept or delivered by the defendant is total of 19 pages, among which the physical card in the name of another person was delivered to the defendant, there is a risk of additional damage by using the above physical card as a total of 12 pages, and the fact that the physical card that the defendant was not recovered from the victim up to the trial is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant shows an attitude against the fact that he was involved in the crime of this case, the crime of this case was committed with multiple attempted crimes, the profit that the defendant acquired by the crime of this case is merely about KRW 900,000,000,000,000, and there is no record of criminal punishment other than the punishment of fine of KRW 3 million on January 5, 2016, and in full view of the defendant's age, character, character, environment and other sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.