2. The so-called phishing crime, in which the Defendant participated, is of structural characteristic that makes it difficult to arrest the entire organization members, and thus, it is highly necessary to eradicate the crime through strict punishment even if not only the person who led the crime but also the subordinate members who participated in only part of the crime, and the role of the Defendant’s cash withdrawal liability is the direct act that is essential to and causes damage to the phishing crime.

Not only the role of the defendant's withdrawal but also the crime of receiving and keeping the access media to be used for the criminal act of Bosing has been committed.

Until the trial, victims' damages were not recovered.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed as unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.