2. The crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the Defendant, where the Defendant lent an access medium for the purpose of obtaining economic compensation, and there is a need to strictly punish the act in order to protect the credibility of the safety performance of electronic financial transactions, and the Defendant’s account was used in committing the crime beyond the singishing organization.

However, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s lending card appears to have been used in committing the instant crime by falling under the horses of the arbishing organization without knowing that it would be used in committing the instant crime; (b) as a result, the Defendant was unable to obtain any particular benefits from the transfer of an access medium; (c) the Defendant did not have any history of criminal punishment; and (d) other conditions of all the sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the offense; and (e) the circumstances after the offense, etc., the Defendant’s sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to be excessive and unfair; (b)

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