The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has the unique area of the first instance court as to the determination of sentencing. As such, in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion,

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the following circumstances, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the court below’s punishment is too unreasonable and it is difficult to deem that the Defendant’s punishment excessively deviates from the reasonable scope of discretion, by taking account of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s act of collecting, delivering, or keeping a large number of physical cards for the purpose of use in the crime according to the instructions of Bosingman; (b) the Defendant’s act of this case was committed with collection, delivery, or storage of, a large number of physical cards for the purpose of use in the crime; and (c) the Defendant’s family members want to have the Defendant’s preference.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.