The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Daegu District Prosecutors' Office, which was seized, was pressured in 2016.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the Prosecutor (a 5 years of imprisonment, confiscation, 10 million won additional collection) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. We also examine the judgment prosecutor and the defendant's respective arguments relating to sentencing.

The so-called " Bosing" crime against many unspecified persons is a crime of deceiving money by deceiving a large number of victims in a systematic and planned manner, and the method of crime is more intelligent and social harm is increasing. The nature of the crime is heavy, and the operation of illegal gambling sites is likely to promote the speculative spirit of the general public and undermine the sound work awareness, and thus social harm is very high.

Each of the crimes of this case has been committed in a systematic and planned manner by sharing roles among the multiple people, and in the process, the defendant served as an essential part of the completion of the crime by taking charge of supplying passbooks and providing offices necessary for telephone financing fraud, managing gambling sites, and withdrawing and delivering proceeds from the crime. It is inevitable to punish the defendant significantly.

However, considering the fact that the defendant led to the crime of this case and reflects the depth of the defendant, T and J, etc., who are co-offenders of the crime of this case, most of the damage were recovered due to repayment to the victims, the defendant did not want the punishment of the above victims under agreement with AM, W and AS, the defendant did not want the punishment of the defendant, and there was no other record of crime except for the punishment of a minor fine once for the crime of this case, the relation between the defendant and co-offenders, equity of punishment between the defendant and the accomplice, and other conditions of punishment as shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is judged that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is correct.