The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the penalty of the original judgment (three million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of 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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015); there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the lower court because new data on sentencing have not been submitted in the trial; the means of access transferred by the defendant is used for another crime; the means of access has been acquired in return for transfer; and the defendant has acquired 6 million won in consideration of the reasons indicated in the record, such as the fact that the sentencing of the lower court is too too large to have been exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion; thus, the defendant’s assertion is groundless

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

[However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the term “application of the Act” of the lower judgment shall be corrected to the term “former Electronic Financial Transactions Act” (amended by Act No. 13069, Jan. 20, 2015).