The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper sentencing)

A. In fact-misunderstanding and legal principles, the fact that the Defendant misunderstanding the fact that the Defendant sent a physical card linked to the post office account in the name of the mother C (hereinafter “the instant card”) to the non-known person was unaware of the fact that the instant card was used for the crime of Bosing. However, there was no intention, and there was no awareness that the act of lending the card was punished even without the purpose of using it for the crime. Therefore, there was no awareness of illegality.

B. The lower court’s sentence (4 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

Although the lower court tried the instant case through a simple trial and convicted the Defendant of the instant facts charged, the lower court revoked the lower court’s order that decided to be tried by a simple trial pursuant to Article 286-3 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the confession at the lower court was not reliable on the fourth trial date, and subsequently conducted a new examination of evidence, the lower court became unable to maintain any further.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined in the following.

B. Determination on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) The instant penal provision is punished for “a lending an access medium while promising to make a consideration,” and the recognition of the use of the leased access medium does not constitute the element of the pertinent penal provision.

Therefore, even if the Defendant had been unaware of the fact that the instant card was used for the phishing crime

The fact that the card of this case, which is an access medium, is clearly recognized is to receive a certain amount from the person who is not his name, and to lend it.