When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

No one may intermediate a third party's communications using telecommunications services provided by a telecommunications business operator or provide such services for a third party's communications.

Nevertheless, around June 2019, the Defendant: (a) delegated the opening and disposal of a mobile phone through the method of sending a resident registration certificate to obtain KRW 20,000 per digital chip from “C”, which he/she became aware of through the publicity bulletin of “the prior-phone and the mobile chip; and (b) delegated the opening and disposal of the mobile chip by affixing a photograph of resident registration certificate necessary to open the prior-to-face on behalf of the Defendant; and (c) allowed the name-invictor to open a new E mobile chip and a number number chip assigned to “A” in the name of the Defendant using his/her resident registration certificate on behalf of the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant provided telecommunications services provided by telecommunications business operators for the purpose of telecommunications.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A statement prepared in F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (B warrant, reply and communication request);

1. Article 97 subparagraph 7 of the Telecommunications Business Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is the case where the defendant in this case requires the defendant to open three core chips on behalf of his/her name in return for the consideration from his/her poor person. Although the amount he/she acquired in return for the consideration can be deemed as a small amount, this act is abused in various criminal acts, such as Bosping and sexual traffic, thereby facilitating it, and thus, it is necessary to strictly deal with the amount acquired by the defendant separately from the amount acquired by the defendant.

In fact, in this case, the number that the defendant allowed the opening of the case was used for the so-called crime of fraud in South Korea, and the actual occurrence of the victim was also occurred.

However, the defendant recognizes all of the instant cases and reflects them.