2. The lower court, based on the fact that there was no previous record of punishment, and the Defendant’s age, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, determined the sentence.

The appellate court, compared to the first instance court, has no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the first instance sentencing judgment.

As the prosecutor asserts on the grounds of appeal, it is recognized that there is a need to strictly punish the transfer of an access medium, which is an essential element for eradicating the Bophishing crime, and that the access medium transferred by the defendant is actually used for the crime of Bophishing and damage has occurred.

However, in light of the sentencing conditions set forth in the court below, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too low, and otherwise, the above sentencing conditions have changed in the court below.

There are no circumstances to see.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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