The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and Defendant B.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of Defendant A (one year of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence (as against the Defendants: one year of imprisonment; two years of probation; two years of probation; two years of community service; 80 hours; and 5 million won of fine) of the lower court is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination:

A. Determination ex officio (as to Defendant A and B), prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant A and the Prosecutor, Article 32(2) of the Criminal Act provides that “the punishment of an accessory offender shall be mitigated to less than that of the principal offender” is determined as the grounds for the necessary mitigation of punishment.

In this regard, the judgment of the court below, which accepted the above Defendants the crime of aiding and abetting the use of computers and others, but omitted aiding and abetting the above Defendants, and determined the punishment by sentence. In this regard, the parts on Defendant A and B among the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

B. Determination of the prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing (as to Defendant C), Defendant C committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, and was punished several times due to the commission of fraud, etc.

However, the defendant recognized and reflected the crime, and the content of the crime also transferred the access media once, and the profits gained therefrom are not significant, and the defendant did not actively participate in the fraud.

In addition, in full view of all other circumstances that serve as the conditions for sentencing, such as Defendant C’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, details and contents of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed unfair since the sentence of the lower court is too low. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the judgment of the court below against Defendant A and B is reversed, and the judgment of the court below against Defendant A and the prosecutor is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the aforementioned grounds for reversal ex officio.