정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(정보통신망침해등)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the Defendant, even though not having the right to access the D company server operated by C, did not have access to the victim company server, can find the fact that the Defendant, without permission, accessed the server in order to download important information, such as customer information, etc.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged of this case shall not intrude into an information and communications network without access authority or beyond the permitted access authority.
Nevertheless, on February 18, 2013, the Defendant intruded into an information and communications network server without any access authority over 43 occasions (round 1, 2, 4, 5 through 7, 13, 14, 16, 17, 25, 26, 39, 40, 46, 53, 53, and 65 were deleted as a result of the amendment to the indictment) as shown in the list of crimes in attached Form 43 until July 16, 2013.
B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated as to the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge that the victim company was entitled to access the victim company’s server, and that there was no reason to view that there was no reason to view the Plaintiff’s right to maintain and repair the company’s ERP system, only by means of remote control after the Defendant retired.
1. The defendant is the head of the online business team of the victim company from July 2009 to December 201.