The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court sentenced the above punishment in consideration of the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant’s deposit account leased was used for the Defendant’s phishing crime, and that the Defendant appears to have no profit from the instant crime, and that the first offender was the first offender.

In addition to the circumstances taken into account as above, the lower court took into account the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime on condition that the Defendant would receive usage fees.

In full view of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, health, circumstances leading to the commission of a crime, means and result, scale of a crime and circumstances after a crime, etc., which can be known through records and pleadings, the sentence sentenced by the lower court appears to be reasonable, and the lower court’s judgment of sentencing exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the sentence imposed by the lower court is unfair because it is too unreasonable as the Defendant alleged.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, since it is obvious that the entry of "Physical Card" as stated between conduct No. 19 and conduct No. 20 of the judgment of the court below is due to mistake and correction ex officio pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure).