A. The sentence of the lower court (No. 10 months of imprisonment, No. 1, 5, and 6 of the confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendant is a favorable circumstance for the following reasons: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of each of the crimes in this case and reflects his mistake; (b) the Defendant was punished for the same crime or has no record of being punished in excess of the fine; and (c) the Defendant deposited KRW 1 million in the trial to recover the victim I’s damage

On the other hand, the defendant took part in the telephone financing fraud crime that is systematically and systematically organized against many unspecified persons and served as a part in delivering physical cards, which is an access medium. Since such social disorder is very large, it is necessary to severely punish the defendant, and the defendant did not agree with the victim I until it is in the trial.

In addition, when comprehensively taking into account the circumstances leading up to each of the crimes in this case, the circumstances after the crime, the Defendant’s environment, etc., and the various sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments in this case, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or is deemed unfair. Therefore, the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.