2. The act of lending a passbook, cash card, etc. (hereinafter “means of access”) which is the means of electronic financial transactions to determine is not only impairing the stability and trust of electronic financial transactions, but also providing any means that facilitates crimes, and thus, social harm caused by such act is not severe and the liability for the relevant crime is not less severe.

In this case, the means of access leased by the defendant was actually used for the singishing crime, and the victim occurred.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s mistake against himself/herself and did not repeat the crime; (b) the number of means of access leased is only one person; and (c) the primary offender is favorable circumstances; and (d) other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing specified in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, economic circumstances, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (c) the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is not deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable to the extent that it is deemed that the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion

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