The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) sentenced by the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The following circumstances are favorable: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; (b) the Defendant applied for suspension of payment to the remaining account and returned money deposited to the Defendant’s account from the telephone financial fraud victim. However, it is not good that the act of lending the means of access in this case can be used as a means of crime, such as telephone financial fraud; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime similar to the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution, even though he/she had the record of being punished for suspension of execution due to the criminal act committed by telephone financial fraud in 2019 when he/she provided the account under the name of the Defendant to the telephone financial fraud crime; (d) the Defendant committed the instant crime similar to the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution; (e) was punished two times due to the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act due to the transfer of the means of access; and (e) other various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

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