Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the various sentencing conditions of the Defendant (unfair sentencing) in this case, the sentence (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the contents and methods of the instant crime and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. In full view of ① favorable circumstances, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to the same punishment as described in Article 1(a) of the above Act, taking into account the following: (i) the Defendant did not seem to be the principal child of the crime; (ii) the Defendant was merely responsible for the delivery of cash; (iii) the attempted crime was committed; and (iv) the Defendant appears to have been involved in the phishing crime in various ways prior to the instant case.

In light of the foregoing, the lower court’s sentencing appears to have been appropriately determined by fully considering the aforementioned sentencing grounds and the sentencing grounds asserted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor. Although an agreement with the victim was reached in the first instance trial, it is difficult to view that the above sentence was changed to the extent of changing the given sentence.

Ultimately, since the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to be too heavy or unreasonable because it is too heavy, the defendant and the prosecutor's argument about the sentencing cannot be accepted in all.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.