2. The instant crime was committed with knowledge that the Defendant was used in the commission of the crime, and the account number and the check card were lent to the Defendant, and the actual account was used in the phishing fraud, and the Defendant’s liability is not less than that of the Defendant.

However, the Defendant, as the first offender, recognized the instant crime and opposed to the mistake.

According to the records, the Defendant appears to have failed to be aware that the access media was actually used for licensing crimes, and some of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime are to be considered.

In addition, considering the circumstances of all the sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., as well as the circumstances favorable or unfavorable to the Defendant, and the reasons for sentencing of the lower judgment, it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too unfeasible and unfair.

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.