The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

2. On the other hand, the fact that the defendant led to the crime of this case and reflects it is favorable for him to do so.

However, the Defendant already been punished for violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act. In particular, the Defendant committed the instant crime by taking over the passbook in the name of E, etc., cash card, etc. four times, and delivering it to an employee of “Singing” under his/her name, even though he/she was well aware that the transfer, transfer, cash card, etc. would be used for the crime of telephone financial fraud. Furthermore, the Defendant’s transfer, transfer, and transfer of the passbook, etc. resulted in the Defendant’s occurrence of four victims by using the actual “Singing” fraud. The Defendant’s act of fraud under the “Sing” of this case, which the Defendant aided and assisted as above, is highly harmful to society by putting a large number of victims in good faith, considerable economic suffering of victims, and thus requires strict punishment. The total amount of damage is a large amount equivalent to KRW 209,15,000, total amount of damage, and the Defendant did not take any measures to recover the Defendant’s age before and after the Defendant’s oral proceeding.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, it is obvious that Article 30 of the Criminal Code has been omitted by mistake in the context of "the pertinent provision on the 1. criminal facts" in the judgment of the court below, since "Article 49 (4) 1 and Article 6 (3) 1 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act" is "Article 6 (3) 1 of the same Act."