The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of execution of two years, and the community service order of 80 hours) declared by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.

A. The prosecutor amended the indictment, while maintaining the previous facts charged in the first instance, applied for the amendment of indictment to add each of the ancillary facts charged as stated below to the facts charged, with respect to Article 49(4)2 and Article 6(3)2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, Article 40 of the Criminal Act, and Article 40 of the Criminal Act. The court permitted the amendment of indictment.

In addition, as seen below, the judgment of the court below that only the primary facts charged can no longer be maintained as long as this court found the defendant guilty of the facts charged added in the preliminary charges.

B. 1) The appellate court may decide on the main facts charged only by the grounds for appeal stated in the petition of appeal or contained in the statement of grounds for appeal submitted within the period for submission of the statement of grounds for appeal. However, as long as the appeal is lawful, the appellate court shall decide on the grounds for ex officio investigation not included in the statement of grounds for appeal submitted within the period for submission of the statement of grounds for appeal (proviso of Article 361-4(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). Here, the grounds for ex officio examination include not only the application of statutes or statutory interpretation, but also obvious mistake of facts and unfair sentencing (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 2002Mo38, May 16, 2003; Supreme Court Order 200Mo564, Mar. 30, 2006). While the Defendant considered only the grounds for appeal on this part of the judgment below as the grounds for appeal, it examines whether there was errors by misapprehending ex officio legal principles or by mistake of facts prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal. 2)