Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

The Defendant, around March 9, 2012, paid a deposit of KRW 270,00,000 to C, which was operated by the Seoyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan City Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., and entered as a photographer, and worked as a photographer by the Defendant. On October 26, 2016, the Defendant sent a text message to the victim E and the victim F, who is his/her his/her father, who is the denying Party C, and is not in contact with C.

It was easy to urge the return of the deposit.

On December 1, 2016, at around 23:35, the Defendant sent the victim E’s cell phone at around 102 dong 1105, Seoul Jung-gu, Seoul, to the victim E’s cell phone. From that time, the Defendant repeatedly sent the victims with words causing fear or apprehensions over 26 times in total, as described in the list of crimes in the attached Table, from February 7, 2017.

Accordingly, the defendant had repeatedly reached the victims through the information and communications network that arouses fear and apprehensions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the closure of text messages;

1. Article 74 (1) 3 of the Act on Promotion of the Utilization of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., and Article 44-7 (1) 3 of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc., concerning facts constituting an offense (limited to cases of victims) and the selection of each fine;

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

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;