The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

The seized Samsung Smartphone (No. 1).

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the punishment imposed by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of ex officio determination, Samsungphone (No. 1), 1SK Card (Evidence No. 2), which was seized by the defendant, is a thing provided for the crime of this case and does not belong to the ownership of a person other than the defendant, and thus, a confiscation should be sentenced. However, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the omission of the declaration of confiscation in the disposition, since the court below was subject to the applicable provisions on confiscation in the "Application of the Act and subordinate statutes" but did not contain any applicable provisions on confiscation in the order

3. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts charged and the summary of the evidence, and thus, it is also accepted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 342 of the Criminal Act and Articles 329 and 30 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The rationale for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act of confiscation is examined, the defendant recognized the facts of the crime and reflects his mistake, the crime of this case is committed against the attempted crime, and there is no record of other criminal punishment in the Republic of Korea, etc., and the circumstances favorable to the defendant are recognized as normal circumstances.

However, the crime of this case is an organized and intelligent crime of the so-called telephone financial fraud that obtains money from many unspecified victims, and it is difficult to regulate the crime because the method of crime is secret and planned, and there is a need for strict punishment due to social harm, and in particular, it intends to steals cash that is withdrawn by entering the victim's residence.