The judgment below

The remainder, excluding a compensation order, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. The sentencing of the court below (one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

2. It is recognized that the Defendant, at a bank for not less than 26 years, left a normal working life, and was subject to a fine twice due to a drunk driving, and was returned to the victim due to the seizure of a part of the last money (17 million won) at the time of the crime of this case, and that the amount of profit acquired by the Defendant is not significant due to the crime of this case.

However, even though the Defendant could have easily known that the process of collecting and delivering cash in this case was not a normal collection business in the course of banking business, he/she had a demand for appearance on July 14, 2020 and July 15, 2020 to deliver the document under the name of the Governor of the Financial Supervisory Service, which was forged, to the victim. On July 17, 2020, the Net Police Station conducted an investigation on the suspicion of cash remittance before it on July 17, 2020 (the identity of the Defendant was KRW 8 million on June 30, 2020, and whether to prosecute).

7. Despite the existence of around 10.10, the instant crime continued to be committed. The instant crime, such as the instant case, was committed on the basis of the following facts: (a) there is a very strong risk of harm and injury inflicted on the society, such as that the applicable criminal law was organized, planned intelligence and multiple victims, and causing financial institutions to put in good faith; (b) the collection and delivery of cash is an essential element for completing the singing crime; and (c) the degree of involvement of the Defendant cannot be deemed to be less and less than that of the Defendant; (d) the facts charged alone are that the nature of the crime is bad and less, and the liability is not less and less than that of the crime; (e) the victims was not recovered from damage; and (e) the sentencing case of the similar case and the scope of the sentencing guidelines for the crime of systematic fraud (an amount of KRW 78,00,000) (in light of the roles and contents of the Defendant’s special crime, it is difficult to view that the crime falls under mitigation scope of the sentencing guidelines.