The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment and confiscation) against the accused against the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Although there are favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant's mistake is divided, there is no record of crime in Korea, that the defendant's crime was committed once, that the defendant's crime was committed, and that the defendant does not seem to have led all the crime, the crime in this case cannot be deemed to be less severe since the crime in this case was committed in terms of the completion of the crime even if the applicable law is organized, planned, intelligent, and the defendant's withdrawal of cash, and even if it is not limited to the withdrawal of cash, it cannot be deemed that the crime in this case has been committed in China. The defendant committed the crime in this case at the time of July 10, 2014 in order to take the role of withdrawal of the crime in this case's use of computer, etc. in China. The defendant committed the crime in this case at an unfavorable time, such as the maximum amount of damage, and other unfavorable circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances, etc., and circumstances after the crime in this case's records and arguments.

Although the Defendant asserts to the effect that the confiscation of the seized mobile phone is unfair, the term "goods provided to the act of crime" in Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act is not limited to those used for the act of crime, such as knife used for murder, and even if those goods are used for the act before the commencement of the act of crime or after the completion of the act of crime, they shall be deemed to be included in the goods provided under the above Article as long as they are deemed to have contributed to the execution of the act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4075, Sept. 14, 2006). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the trial court, the Defendant opened the cell phone on the same day after entering the country on July 10, 2014, and through the above mobile phone, the instant crime in China was committed.