Defendant

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

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserted that Defendant A’s punishment (one year and four months of imprisonment, confiscation) declared by the court below against the above accused is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the sentence against the above accused (two years of suspended execution of imprisonment in October) is too unfeasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. We also examine the criminal defendant A and the prosecutor's improper arguments in sentencing.

The defendant took the attitude of recognizing and opposing the defendant's wrong, and with respect to the crime using personal information of 873 foreign persons related to the crime table I of the judgment below, G and H appears to play the leading role rather than the defendant. The defendant's custody of more than 1,00 core chips used in so-called "line non-phone" which was opened by using personal information of 1,000 foreigners related to the crime table II through V of the judgment below without carrying out the 1,00 core chips outside the outside, it seems that the above core chips were not used for the so-called "large chip". The defendant's profits from the crime of this case appears to have been paid 20,000 won for each single unit of core chips and the amount of 300,000 won for each person who requested the crime. In addition to the defendant's punishment four times, the existence of the defendant's punishment should be determined in consideration of the circumstances to determine the existence of the defendant's punishment.

However, the crime of this case is not only a serious damage to the social trust required for handling the core and sensitive personal information of customers, such as passport pictures, passport numbers, and foreigner registration numbers, which is bound to be submitted during the opening of the mobile phone, but also can readily block the crime due to the characteristics of the crime.