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

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 March 2, 2018, the Defendant purchased the prepaid chip (USIMF) of the C mobile phone, which was opened in B’s name, from an in-depth wholesaler on 100,000 won, and sold 170,000 won and sold it to an in-depth person who contacted with D Mes via D Mes on March 6, 2018, and sold the core chip opened in another person’s name 15 times as shown in the attached list of crimes.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The content of each E dialogue;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to applications for subscription for each prepaid telephone;

1. Article 97 subparagraph 7 of the relevant Act on Criminal Facts and the main sentence of Article 30 of the Telecommunications Business Act;

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act, taking into account the following factors: (a) the motive and background of the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s mistake is recognized; and (c) the Defendant’s age; (d) the criminal records; and (e) the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the court sentenced the Defendant to a suspended sentence of imprisonment as ordered; and (c) ordered the Defendant to provide community service for

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.