The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the defendant to the penalty (4 million won of a fine) is too unhued and unfair.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the aforementioned legal principles, there is room to regard the Defendant as belonging to the phrase that he was guilty of a crime; the lower court did not have any previous record; and the phrase that “on the basis of the creation of a physical card, he would allow the transfer of the means of access to electronic financial transactions.” The transfer of the means of access is highly likely to be used for the scaming crime, and social harm is very high; the Defendant actually transferred the means of access was actually used for the scaming crime; the Defendant was sentenced to punishment within a reasonable scope; and there is no other circumstance to be newly considered in the trial; considering the various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing in the sentencing process of the lower court, such as the motive, means and consequence of the crime; and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to be excessive beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

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