A. In determining facts, the Defendant: (a) obtained access authority from the victim C on the ground that hacking of the Defendant’s account of the Internet Lyn Game is suspected of the victim C’s act of action; (b) connected the Internet Nyn Game by obtaining access authority from the victim C; and (c) it does not exceed the access authority granted from C in order to track ice (IP); and (d) the Defendant sold C’s items and the Defendant’s item to the victim G; (c) the Defendant was able to use the same item and sell it to G; and (d) there was no intent to commit fraud due to sufficient means to repay the same item; and (e) the lower court convicted all of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

B. Even if all of the facts charged of this case’s unfair sentencing are found guilty, in light of the fact that damage is relatively minor and there is no same kind of power, the sentence imposed by the court below (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The determination of the assertion of mistake of facts is not a provision for protecting the user’s trust or interests, but a provision for protecting the stability of the information and communications network itself and the reliability of such information. As such, the subject granting or allowing access authority under the above provision is a service provider. Therefore, if a third party, other than the user authorized by the service provider, connects the information and communications network, whether the access authority exists shall be determined based on the access authority granted by the service provider.

Even if a user has allowed a third party to use an information and communications network by informing him/her of his/her ID and password and consenting to the use thereof, the use of the third party shall be the user.