2. The instant case pertains to the Defendant’s acquisition of the means of access used for the so-called Bosing crime several times, and the degree of the Defendant’s participation as a whole as the head of the passbook recruitment system cannot be deemed minor.

The circumstances where it is difficult to arrest the entire organization or to recover the amount of fraud due to the nature of the Bosing crime committed in the form of the occupied organization, the adverse effect of the Bosing crime on the whole society should also be considered.

It is also recognized that the defendant sent a letter of escape to C, who is an accomplice after the defendant was admitted.

However, the Defendant is a domestic first offender, and the period of the instant crime is less than 10 days, and the instant crime is limited to the acquisition of the means of access to six accounts, and there is no trace of activities, such as the withdrawal of the singishing crime.

It seems that the defendant's direct profit from crime is not enough.

In addition, considering the motive of the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, the age, character and conduct of the Defendant, and criminal records as well as various other circumstances that form the sentencing conditions as shown in the records and pleadings, the sentence of the lower court is too unfasible and unfair.

3. Accordingly, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.