The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is deemed to have been committed by the Defendant in violation of the Telecommunications Business Act by opening eight prepaids to the person who was unaware of his name, receiving the compensation therefor, providing his account to the person who was unaware of name, and delivering the money that the defrauded remitted to the said account to the person who was unaware of name, thereby aiding and abetting the crime of telephone financial fraud, such as the person who was unaware of name, etc., in light of the law and content of the crime, etc., the crime is considerably poor in light of the nature of the crime, and the crime of Bosing is highly harmful to society. The crime of Bosing is deemed to require strict punishment. The Defendant was punished by a fine for fraud, and the Defendant was sentenced to a criminal offense committed by the crime of this case during the period of suspension of the execution of imprisonment sentenced for a sentence of imprisonment for around 2018 even though he had been sentenced to the suspension of the execution

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the mistake in depth, the crime of this case is committed in aiding and abetting the crime of this case, and the crime of fraud, etc. for which the crime of this case and the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive, are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and should take account of equity with the case at the same time, and the defendant paid 3.5 million won to the victim of the crime of aiding and abetting the crime of this case, and agreed with the victim by paying 3.5 million won to the victim, there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the suspended sentence of imprisonment prior to the crime of this case, and there is no record of criminal punishment for the defendant. In full view of other various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, including the defendant's age, career, character

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is justified.