The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Article 2 subparag. 3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”) provides for “information and communications services providers” as ① telecommunications business operators and ② telecommunications business operators who provide information using telecommunications services by profit-making telecommunications business operators, and the Defendant is a telecommunications business operator operating B for the main purpose of Internet advertising agency and website production, and the Defendant is a provider of information and communications services. A corporation D (hereinafter “D”) collected and stored personal information of users participating in the above event from the East Life to use it as marketing data through “buckbucks and coffees received” from the East Life, resulting in a problem in the server while collecting and keeping the personal information of users who participated in the above event while entering into a server and entering into a server server consignment agreement with the Defendant who operates B, thereby

However, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that he merely used the personal information of E which the defendant came to know in the course of performing server entrustment business between D and D, and there is no evidence to recognize that he collected information of E as an information and communications service provider. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misunderstanding

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, the prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment with respect to each time of the surrounding and conjunctive facts charged in the instant case. Since the subject of the judgment was changed by this court's permission, the judgment of the court below, which is based on the original facts charged, cannot be maintained any more.

However, despite the above amendment of indictment, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court.