The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable in light of the outline of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment).

2. It is recognized that the Defendant is a domestic first offender, and that the means of access that the Defendant acquired is only five, and that there is a concern about health after brain surgery in 2008 due to traffic accidents.

However, the Defendant’s participation in the instant crime cannot be deemed minor, even if the period of participation is short and the number of means of access is not large.

The circumstances where it is difficult to arrest the entire organization or to recover the amount of fraud due to the nature of the Bosing crime committed in the form of the occupied organization, the adverse effect of the Bosing crime on the whole society should also be considered.

In addition, there is no change in the overall circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records, such as Defendant’s age, career, character and conduct, family environment, etc. compared to the original judgment. In full view of all the above circumstances, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. 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.