The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, due to intellectual disability, has weak the intent and ability to discern things at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (three million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the part of the claim of mental disability, it is difficult to view that the Defendant was in a state of lacking ability to discern things or make decisions due to intellectual disability at the time of committing the instant crime, taking full account of the following circumstances: (a) although the Defendant is deemed to have been a disabled person of Grade II of intellectual disability, the Defendant sent two physical card connected to his own account in order to receive money by having telephone conversations only one month in the name of the Defendant; and (b) the Defendant sent the card and stated that he did not contact with the other party, and filed an application for suspension of the card with the bank because he did not contact with the other party; and (c) the Defendant’s statement and attitude on before and after the instant crime.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental disability is without merit.

B. In light of the various sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case, considering the following: (a) the Defendant’s leased account was used to commit Bophishing fraud; (b) the Defendant lent the account for the purpose of obtaining economic benefits; (c) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime; (d) the primary offender who has no record of criminal punishment; (c) the Defendant was in an economically difficult situation; and (d) the Defendant was a disabled person of class 2 with intellectual disability, who supported the wife of class 3 with intellectual disability; and (e) the Defendant supported the wife of class 3 with intellectual disability, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.