The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Seized evidence 1 or 2 shall be confiscated.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (i.e., imprisonment with prison labor for a year, 1, 2, and 1) is too heavy or (ii) it is too heavy.

2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s respective unfair claims for sentencing.

The crime of Bosing is completed by performing individual roles such as an access medium recruitment, cash withdrawal, and delivery books. Although the Defendant did not lead the crime or take part in the principal offender, the Defendant’s liability is not less than KRW 150,000 by delivering access media, such as physical cards, even though he did not take part in the crime.

However, the intent of the Defendant’s crime of aiding and abetting phishing seems to be dolusent, and the proceeds of the crime (235 million won) are not large, the efforts have been made to live as legitimate income sources such as substitute driving, etc. after the crime, the fact that the amount exceeding the proceeds of the crime has been donated to social welfare organizations, the fact that there is no criminal record in addition to the punishment of the punishment of the Defendant once, and other circumstances such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, home environment, motive for the crime, the lower court’s punishment seems to be unreasonable, and the Prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing is rejected.

[On the other hand, Article 32(6) and Article 32(1) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies (hereinafter “Act”) provide that concurrent crimes of violation of financial-related Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and other crimes shall be tried and sentenced separately, notwithstanding Article 38 of the Criminal Act.

Article 31 of the Act provides for the requirements, etc. for approving the change of a person who intends to become a major shareholder of a financial company. Article 32 of the Act provides for the requirements, etc. for maintaining eligibility for one largest investor among the major shareholders who are already in the position of a major shareholder of a financial company, and its subject is different. ① Article 31 of the Act does not provide for separate hearings.