2. The fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflected the mistake, and that there seems to be no benefit acquired from the instant crime, is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the crime of transferring the means of access, such as this case, is highly likely to be abused for other serious crimes by impairing the stability and reliability of electronic financial transactions.

The means of access transferred by the defendant was actually used in the crime of fraud, resulting in damage, not recovery from the damage, and there is no possibility of recovery.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, and the new circumstances or special changes in circumstances that may be reflected in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

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