2. Determination is based on the following facts: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the crime; (b) the Defendant appears to have no profit acquired from the crime of this case; (c) the transfer of the electronic financial transaction access medium to another person is likely to cause damage to many and unspecified persons because it can be used for the crime; (d) the account linked to the access medium that the Defendant transferred is used for the crime of fraud; (e) the transfer of the access medium as in this case needs to be punished to eradicate the crimes of Bosphishing, etc.; and (e) the Defendant has the history of imposing fines more than one time and criminal punishment suspending the execution of imprisonment twice.

The Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, on the ground that the lower court’s punishment is reasonable, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, career, family relation, economic situation, background and motive leading up to the commission of an offense; (b) circumstances after the commission of an offense; and (c) other matters regarding the sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments on changes

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. It is so decided as per Disposition.