2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant is against the confession of the crime, the fact that the defendant seems to have no profit acquired by the crime of this case, and the economic situation of the defendant is difficult.

However, taking into account the reality that the so-called large passbook is both shared by transferring and lending the means of electronic financial transactions, such as the instant crime, and such large passbook is abused for all kinds of crimes, the Defendant’s liability is not less than that of the crime; the electronic financial transaction actually transferred by the Defendant was used for the crime; and the Defendant seems to have sufficiently predicted that the means of access provided by the Defendant may be used for the crime; the Defendant’s previous convictions punished by the same crime are only one time; and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s character and conduct, environment, motive and background, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be determined to be unduely unreasonable.

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