The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The prosecutor asserts that the reasoning of the appeal is too unfasible and unfair, as it is too unfased in the punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of suspended sentence and observation of protection in October).

2. Before judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, in the event there are concurrent grounds for mitigation of punishment ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the public prosecutor ex officio, the punishment should be mitigated by law pursuant to Article 56 of the Criminal Act and the punishment should be aggravated by concurrent crimes, but the court below erred in legal mitigation after aggravated concurrent crimes, which led to a change in the scope of punishment.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained as it erred in the application of statutes and affected the conclusion of the judgment.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment of the court below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Re-written judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court and the summary of evidence are as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below (Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act). Application of the law is as stated in the applicable column of the judgment below.

1. Articles 347(1), 32(1) (a) and 49(4)1 and 6(3)1 (a) of the Criminal Act on criminal facts, as to the relevant provision of the Criminal Act, and Articles 6(3)1 (a) of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act;

2. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act for the ordinary concurrent crimes (which shall be between violations of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act).

3. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

4. Article 32(2) and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (with respect to aiding and abetting fraud), which is statutory mitigation;

5. former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2 and Article 50 of the same Act, the aggravation of concurrent crimes;

6. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution;

7. The crime of this case committed by the Defendant on the grounds of sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for the observation of protection and observation that the Defendant transferred to the so-called Bosing Organization access media under one’s name and supervised so that other access media transferors may not withdraw money.