The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

The number of seized smartphones (galtho S7H) shall be increased.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment and six months) of the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below has already been four times of previous crimes (in the case of punishment two times of actual punishment, fine two times of punishment, and the final sentence of punishment, there are crimes of electronic communication financial fraud in the case of the same kind of repeated crime), and the crime of this case was committed more than anything else. The crime of this case was committed with multiple unspecified victims systematically and systematically, and was actively involved in the crime of telecommunications-based financial fraud, such as the amount of money and delivery liability, and the use of forged official documents, which are of significant importance in the crime. On the other hand, the crime of this case directly participated in the crime of this case and there was no substantial damage to the defendant, and the crime of this case was committed in this case, and there was no actual damage to the defendant's life, and its circumstances are considered in light of its circumstances and circumstances, the defendant's fault is divided into several circumstances favorable to the defendant, and the defendant's age, condition of character and behavior, and the defendant's assertion that the punishment of this case is unfair.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is with merit. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is ruled after pleading.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence, and thus, the gist of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of

Application of Statutes

1. The fact that the relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment are attempted to commit fraud as prescribed in Articles 352, 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, and imprisonment with prison labor;