All appeals filed by the Defendants and the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s punishment against the Defendants (unfair sentencing) is so unreasonable that it is too unreasonable that the Defendants are punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year and two months and confiscation, Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor for one year and one confiscation).

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The Defendants did not have any history of criminal punishment beyond a fine; the confession of the crime is favorable to the Defendants; the Defendants’ participation in the organized fraud crime is not good; and the transfer of the stored access media is considerable considering the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendants.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances, such as the Defendants’ age, sex and environment, motive, means, and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it does not seem that the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too heavy or unfeasible and unfair.

3. If so, each appeal against the Defendants and the public prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[1] Article 32(1) of the Act on Corporate Governance of Financial Companies (hereinafter “Act”) provides that one of the largest shareholders of a financial company shall examine the requirements for maintaining eligibility, such as whether the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act, the Punishment of Tax Offenses Act, and the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, are in violation of the laws and subordinate statutes prescribed by Presidential Decree. Article 32(6) of the Act provides that a person who concurrently commits a violation of the Acts and subordinate statutes provided for in paragraph (1) and another crime shall be tried and sentenced separately, notwithstanding Article 38 of the Criminal Act. Of the grounds for the punishment of this case, the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, among the laws of this case, is in accordance with Articles 5 and 27(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act.