The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

The 2nd proof of the seized Samsung electronic mobile phone No. 23.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the original court’s punishment (the imprisonment for one year and six months, and the seizure of seized evidence 1 to 26) is too unreasonable;

2. The lower court, based on Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act, confiscated evidence Nos. 1 to 22 and 25, respectively, from the Defendant.

In order to apply Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act, it shall not belong to the ownership of a person other than the criminal, or it shall be an object which was provided or intended to be provided to a person other than the criminal with the criminal knowledge of the fact that the person other than the criminal was knowingly acquired after the crime. There is no evidence to support that the seized 50,000 won, 100 won, 250 won, 250 (Evidence No. 25) and 10,000 won (Evidence No. 25) have been provided or intended to be provided to the criminal act of this case, and each cash card (Evidence No. 3 through 22) seized shall not be deemed to have been owned by a person other than the criminal, or acquired by a person other than the criminal

Nevertheless, the lower court was no longer able to maintain in this respect, since all of them were confiscated.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court of original instance, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Articles 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. The crime of fraud of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act is a serious financial fraud crime committed in a planned and organized manner by taking many and unspecified persons as the object of crime under the so-called Bophishing method.