Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. When considering the various circumstances of the defendant, the sentence of the court below (one year of imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the various circumstances of the prosecutor, the sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The Defendant is a domestic first offender.

It is recognized that the crime of this case is limited to the "violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act" committed during the period of the crime, and that the direct profits of the defendant are unlikely to exist due to the crime, and that the defendant is in depth against the defendant, and that social ties are relatively clear.

However, this case is a case where the Defendant received and stored access media used for the so-called phishing crime, and withdrawn and remitted the amount of damage, and the period for which the Defendant stated is short, and the “crime of fraud” caused by the phishing was not prosecuted.

The degree of the defendant's participation as a whole in the delivery of a medium of access by the entire host organization, and the degree of the defendant's participation as a withdrawal, is minor.

shall not be deemed to exist.

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 a braille organization, and the adverse effect of the crimes of Bosing shall also be considered to the whole society of our society.

In addition, there is no change in the overall circumstances that form the conditions for various sentencing on the records, such as the motive for the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, and sexual conduct, compared to the lower court’s judgment. In full view of the above circumstances and the scope of the statutory penalty for the crime of violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act and the applicable sentences, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to be too heavy or unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Accordingly, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.