All appeals filed by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that each of the punishments (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for six months, confiscation (Evidence No. 8, 9, 12 through 16), Defendant B’s imprisonment for nine months, confiscation (Evidence No. 1 through 7, 10, 11) for which the court below sentenced the Defendants is too heavy or (Defendant) is too heavy.

2. The crime of violation of the Act on the Electronic Financial Transactions is highly likely to cause other property crimes, and the social harm is serious, so strict punishment is required.

The Defendants shall keep the access media that can be abused for other crimes after receiving the consideration therefor, and shall withdraw cash using it, and commit the crime of scaming to the scam criminal using the method of deposit without passbook, etc.

On the other hand, the Defendants did not have any record of punishment in excess of the same crime or fine, and the physical card kept by the Defendants was confiscated.

Defendant

A has withdrawn money to assist Defendant B, but the basic duties are the custody and delivery books, so there is relatively little degree of contribution to crime compared to Defendant B who was mainly responsible for withdrawal.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court’s sentencing committee, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendants and the prosecutor's arguments are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the Defendants and the public prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the Defendants and the public prosecutor is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.