The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant asserts that, on the grounds of the appeal of this case, the punishment of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

However, it is recognized that each of the crimes of this case, in which the defendant was a first offender in Korea, and the defendant received and kept 10 means of access over a month.

However, this case is a case where the defendant acquired the means of access to withdraw the amount of damage acquired from the so-called singinginging crime, and even if the number of crimes is not much, the defendant cannot be deemed to be less than the degree of participation because it is apparent that the defendant performed not only the collection or delivery of the means of access but also the withdrawal of the entire singinging organization.

Due to the nature of the singing crime committed in the form of the occupied organization, circumstances where it is difficult to arrest the entire organization or punish by specifying the whole content of the crime, and the adverse effect of the singing crime on the whole society should also be considered.

As such, the Defendant’s circumstance and method of committing the instant crime, motive for committing the instant crime, degree of participation, other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, career, home environment, and history of punishment, did not change compared to the lower court’s judgment, and comprehensively considering all the above circumstances, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no reason to appeal.