However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant is a person who operated a mobile phone agency with the trade name of “C” in the Gu, U.S. City B.

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.

Around April 23, 2018, the Defendant: (a) under the proposal, the Defendant misrepresented the “E chief” introduced through the instant agent via the instant agent, and attempted to use the prepaid in the name of the influor, such as the owner of the instant work, the substitute driver, and the delivery of text messages for stock advertisement; (b) under the name of the person who introduces the Plaintiff, he/she opened the prepaid in the name of the person who introduces the goods and delivered the freight to the said defective person via the cargo lot in the F’s name; and (c) sent the said name via the cargo lot from the said date to May 15, 2018; and (d) sent 33 of the prepaid in the same way as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table to the list of crimes, and then sent the name of the influor.

Accordingly, the defendant provided telecommunications services provided by telecommunications business operators for another's communications.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. A certificate of electronic information;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (the first order in the Supreme Court related to the facts of crime), a report on an investigation (the 882 Stockholm data), a report on an investigation (the rearrangement of a warrant of search and seizure), a report on an investigation (the organization of a warrant of search and seizure), a report on an investigation (the organization of aC materials and a list of crimes), a report on an

1. Article 97 subparagraph 7 of the Telecommunications Business Act and Articles 30 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act is committed by the defendant, who opened the prepaid judgment of another person.