The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and for a defendant B, for six months, respectively.

(b).

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the lower court sentenced the Defendants (two years of imprisonment; confiscation; one year of imprisonment; one year of confiscation); and one year of confiscation) is unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The crime of delivery or storage of access media under Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)3 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act constitutes one crime for each access medium, and the crime of delivery or storage of multiple access media in a lump sum constitutes one act of committing a crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and each crime constitutes a commercial concurrence relationship (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1530, Mar. 25, 2010). Since the Defendants stored several copies of card at the time of the crime of storage of each access medium as indicated in the judgment below, each of the crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act is a commercial concurrence relationship.

However, as the lower court omitted the Defendants’ judgment on the receipt of each of the crimes in violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, the lower court was unable to maintain any further.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio without examining the defendants' unfair assertion of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed ex officio and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

[Grounds for a new judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Defendant A of the pertinent legal provision on criminal facts: Articles 347(1) and 30 (each fraud) of the Criminal Act; Articles 49(4)2 and 6(3)3 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act; Article 30 (a) of the Criminal Act: Defendant B: Each of the following Articles 49(4)2 and 6 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.