Acquittal of the accused shall be acquitted.

A. Since the defendant was issued a summary order for the same criminal facts as the facts charged in the instant case, a judgment of acquittal should be rendered.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 2.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows: “No person, in using and managing the means of access, shall engage in any act of lending the means of access by demanding or promising to receive, demand or promise any compensation unless otherwise specifically provided for in other Acts, but the Defendant, who is not aware of his/her name, would give KRW 3 million if he/she lends an account in connection with taxes to operate the advertising company.

"Around 18:00 on November 17, 2017, after receiving the proposal, leased the means of access to the contract by promising Kwikset service to pay for the physical personal data at the convenience store near the “C” located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government through Kwikset service at the convenience store near the Defendant’s name.”

According to the records, on April 26, 2018, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for a crime of violating the Electronic Financial Transactions Act at the Seoul Southern District Court (No. 2305, Jun. 16, 2018) with respect to the above facts charged, and the summary order became final and conclusive on June 16, 2018.

Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a final judgment, and thus, a judgment of acquittal should be rendered pursuant to Article 326 subparagraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The defendant's assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles is justified.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is with merit.

[The reasoning of the judgment written in multiple times] The summary of the facts charged in this case was examined in the same paragraph as the above Paragraph 2.