A. The sentence of the lower court (one year, six months of imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

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

2. The circumstances are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant repents his criminal act from the investigation stage to the trial of the court, the fact that the defendant's acquisition profit is not significant, the fact that the seized KRW 7.60,000 won has been recovered by temporarily returning to the victim D, and that the defendant has no criminal records of the same kind.

However, since the so-called "scaming" fraud, such as the crime of this case, is serious harm to society as a whole, and since the role in the crime is subdivided and operated in the form of occupied organization as a result of each implementation act, it becomes a serious social problem now, it is necessary to strictly punish the crime even if the defendant was in charge of partial implementation. The defendant played a role to fully acquire the profit of the crime with the transfer of the Boscaming organization. On May 10, 2017 and May 31, 2017, the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor's Office's Office suspended indictment twice for the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and the fact that the victims agreed with the victims or did not recover the damage excluding the portion temporarily returned, etc., are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment and other sentencing conditions, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to be too light or unreasonable.

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