2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the first instance court, and to respect the sentencing of the first instance court where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). It is recognized that there is no record of criminal punishment except for the Defendant’s recognition of the instant crime and reflects his/her mistake, and that there is no history of criminal punishment except for this type of crime sentenced once to a fine, and that the Defendant’s family members and siblings want to repeat the Defendant’s preference.

However, in light of the nature of the instant criminal act and its social harm, etc., the crime of this case was committed in collusion with other accomplices in collusion with the Defendant to receive a certain amount of price, and thus, the nature of the instant criminal act was inferior in view of the systematic and differentiated chips connected to another person’s account to be used for the instant criminal act. The Defendant directly gathered G, who is another accomplice, and delivered it to G for the purpose of using it, as well as suggested not only the Defendant directly gathered G, which is an other accomplice, but also the degree of participation in the instant criminal act, such as proposing to participate in the additional criminal act, such as “passing”, etc.

In full view of the following circumstances: (a) there is a need to strictly punish the crimes committed by subordinate staff members, such as “measures to invite accounts,” as well as the chief staff who led the special sexual intercourse or the crimes in question; (b) there is no special circumstance to newly consider after the pronouncement of the lower judgment; (c) equity in sentencing with similar cases and other accomplices; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sex behavior; (d) motive, means and consequence of the instant crimes; and (e) other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3.