All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the punishment imposed by the lower court on each of the Defendants (Defendant A: a fine of 6 million won, Defendant B: a fine of 4 million won) is too uneased.

2. In addition to the prosecutor’s unfair argument of sentencing against the Defendants, the lower court sentenced the Defendants to the above punishment by taking account of the following favorable circumstances: (a) the transfer and lending of the access medium for electronic financial transactions can be used as a means of other crimes; (b) the access medium leased by the Defendants was used to commit fraud; and (c) the Defendant A was highly likely to commit the instant crime without being aware of it during the suspension period of execution due to fraud; (d) the Defendants recognized the Defendants’ mistake and reflect the Defendants; (b) Defendant B was punished once for the instant crime; and (c) the Defendants did not have any other criminal record other than the punishment once for the instant crime; and (d) the Defendants appears to have no profit from the actual acquisition of the instant crime.

Even when considering the unfavorable circumstances that the Defendants’ nature of the crime is not somewhat weak, comprehensively considering the favorable circumstances, such as the Defendants’ act of lending the principal case was only once, and the Defendants’ failure to be punished as a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and all other factors of sentencing, such as the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, background leading up to the commission of the crime, means and consequence, scale of the crime, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, it cannot be deemed unfair that the lower court’s judgment of sentencing has exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion or maintaining it as it is (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Accordingly, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the Prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendants is without merit. Thus, all of the appeals are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.