전자금융거래법위반등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is improper because it is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of imprisonment, and the number of seized evidence Nos. 1 to 14) is too unreasonable.
2. The Defendant served as a liability for the withdrawal of cash in the crime of Bosing. In full view of all the sentencing conditions stated in the records and changes theory, the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court was excessive, and thus, was exceeded the scope of reasonable discretion for sentencing, even in light of all the sentencing conditions stated in the records and changes theory in the instant case where there are no special changes in circumstances that make it possible to change the sentence of the lower court’s punishment. In so doing, the Defendant’s punishment imposed on an unspecified number of unspecified persons is excessive, and the damage was not recovered in relation to the victims of the instant fraud including Bosing. Some victims did not have to recover from the relationship with the victims of the instant case, including Bosing. Some victims wanted to commit a serious punishment against the Defendant; and the crime committed by the use of computers, etc. was not good.
It is difficult to see it.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.