The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

1. The lower court’s sentence (6 million won in penalty) against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. Determination may take into account favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized his criminal act, the fact that the Defendant did not gain much benefits from the instant criminal act, and the first offender, etc.

However, the crime of this case requires strict punishment for the crime of providing access media and cellular phone, which is an essential means for the crime of phishing, which has a very serious social and economic harm recently.

In particular, the Defendant established a false legal entity on the ground of his/her representative as his/her representative upon the request of a person who was unable to obtain his/her name, and opened a financial account in the name of the legal entity, transferred connected media, opened a mobile phone in the name of another legal entity, and delivered the mobile phone in the name of the other legal entity whose representative is his/her own representative to use it to the person who was unable to obtain his/her name, and caused a lot of Bosing frauds through

As such, in full view of the circumstances revealed in the records and arguments of this case, including the background of the crime of this case, the method and method of the crime of this case, the fact that the nature of the crime is not very good in light of the result, the fact that there are three or more corporations established by the representative of the defendant, and other circumstances, such as the defendant's age, occupation, sex, sex, environment, family relationship, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the court below's prior fine against the defendant is less severe.

Since the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is justified.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the following decision is rendered after pleading.

【Re-written part of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting the crime and summary of evidence, and thus, the summary of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is true in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.