The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. However, it is recognized that the circumstances such as the confession of the instant facts charged by the Defendant in depth, and the Defendant appears to have relatively much benefit from the instant crime, and the excessive competition among mobile communication companies for promotion of the Internet service of this case appears to have some aspects of inducing the instant crime.

However, as to the Defendant’s crime of this case, the Defendant’s Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro Mabro, which had a need to pay money but could not borrow money from a financial institution, and paid only a part of the money sold to the Defendant and take profits therefrom, and the Defendant, etc. are the victim’s mobile communication company. In addition, the Defendant paid a small amount of money to the persons in need of pay, and incurred serious social problems by carrying out excessive obligations such as service fees, such as so on and after he paid a small amount of money to the persons in need of pay. The instant crime of this case, in collusion with D, G, etc., obtained a large amount of KRW 2.5 billion in total from the victim company, and the Defendant was punished for the same or similar crimes, and the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same or similar crimes, and the Defendant again violated the Act of Seoul District Court 10.