A All appeals filed by the Defendants and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. Defendant A’s punishment (an amount of KRW 3 million) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants by the Prosecutor (Defendant A: the same as above, Defendant B: fine of KRW 3 million) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The act of lending to another person the access medium of electronic financial transactions requires strict punishment as it is abused as a means of other crime to cause considerable damage to the general public, and the fact that the access medium leased by the Defendants was actually used to commit fraud is disadvantageous.

However, in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015), and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court, since new materials for sentencing have not been submitted at the trial court, and the circumstances in which Defendant A and the prosecutor alleged for each reason for sentencing have already been reflected in the lower court’s sentencing grounds. In full view of all other circumstances, including the motive, means, and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing with Defendant A is too heavy or unhued, and the sentencing of Defendant B is too unhued so that it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, Defendant A and Prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by Defendant A and the appeal by the prosecutor against the Defendants is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.