The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal (ten months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) of the lower court is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.

2. The following circumstances are acknowledged: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime and reflects his mistake in depth; (b) the Defendant repaid and agreed to the victim C with the amount of damage; (c) the Defendant committed the crime of fraud against the victim D with an attempted attempt to cause property damage; (d) the Defendant did not have any history of punishment in the Republic of Korea; and (e) the Defendant’s family members wished to have the Defendant’s wife against the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case is committed by the defendant as a cash collection measure of the crime organization of Bosing criminal, by deceiving 6,50,000 won by the victim C, and by deceiving 50,000,000 won by approaching the victim D, and by taking account of the methods and contents of the crime, it is very poor that the crime is committed in light of the nature of the crime. The crime of Bosing phish is tight and organized, and it is difficult to regulate the scope of damage because it is difficult to prevent the crime, and it is highly highly harmful to the society because the scope of damage is not only differentiated and narrow but also has structural characteristics that are not easy to recover damage, it is deemed that there is a need to strictly punish the crime. In full view of various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument of this case, including the circumstances such as equity of sentencing with the punishment of the same and similar cases, the age, character and conduct of the defendant, the motive and circumstances of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is justified.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied reasoning] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court are the same as that of the judgment below. Thus, Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act applies.