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.

On August 7, 2018, the Defendant opened a mobile phone in the name of the Defendant in the name of the site that he became aware of through B and sent the relevant core chip in return, and received KRW 30,000 per month. On August 7, 2018, the Defendant contacted four communications companies, such as the special news company C, etc. in the mobile phone page near the Seoul Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “C”), informed the Defendant’s resident registration number, the current user mobile phone number, and the certification number contained in the mobile phone opening text, and then, caused the defect in the name of the Defendant by means of a non-face-to-face opening.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on written statements and data requested for communications data;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Article 97 subparagraph 7 of the Telecommunications Business Act and Article 30 of the same Act;

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

1. Provisional payment order: To reduce part of the amount of fine determined by the summary order in consideration of the fact that the defendant's mistake is divided, and that the defendant is the principal offender, in light of the circumstances leading to the crime of this case according to the solicitation of the grounds for sentencing under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.