1. The lower court determined that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendants’ payment of incentives to agents through sales incentives policy from October 31, 2014 to November 2, 2014 constitutes an act of inducing agents prohibited under Article 9(3) of the Act on the Improvement of the Mobile Device Distribution Improvement (hereinafter “Act”) to provide an unreasonably discriminative subsidy to users, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, thereby acquitted the Defendants of the changed facts charged in the instant case.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the “act of inducing” under Article 9(3) of the Act.

2. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.