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. The Defendant is a domestic first offender.

The defendant's direct profits from the crime of this case are not significant, and most of the means of access being kept in custody are seized, and it seems that the crime of this case did not proceed to the third party.

However, this case is a case where the defendant had the means of access used in the so-called Bosing crime and had the custody thereof, and it cannot be deemed that the defendant's participation in the delivery of the means of access as a whole, and the extent of the defendant's participation in the withdrawal, is minor.

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 for various sentencing indicated in the records, such as the motive for the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the degree of participation, the number of means of access, the age and personality and conduct of the Defendant, compared to the original court. 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. Therefore, this part of the Defendant

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.