All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. As to the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act in the instant case, the lower court rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecution, and rendered a judgment of conviction as to the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act in the instant case, 2016 order 3113 order, and filed an appeal only against the Defendant and the Prosecutor.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against which the prosecutor did not appeal is affirmed, and thus, the judgment of this court is limited to the guilty part of the judgment below.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the court below is too heavy or too unfased (the defendant).

3. In full view of the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant (the fact that social harm is in need of strict punishment as in the instant case in order to cope with phishing crimes, the fact that the Defendant’s check was actually used for phishing crimes) and the circumstances favorable to the Defendant (the fact that the Defendant is the primary offender with no criminal record, and the mistake is divided) and all other sentencing conditions in the instant records and pleadings, the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is deemed appropriate, and is too heavy or too unreasonable.

4. In conclusion, since all appeals filed by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit, they are all dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, in the application of the text of the lower judgment, it is apparent that the phrase “1. Standing concurrence: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act” was omitted on the basis of “1. In addition, ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure” is corrected.