All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, Defendant A and B, who is not an attorney-at-law, promises to receive money and other valuables and other benefits, and refer to the “U” (hereinafter referred to as “U”).

(2) The lower court determined that Defendant B was not guilty of the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act among the facts charged against the Defendants on a different premise, by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the legal consultation, preparation of legal documents, and other legal affairs with respect to the cases of his/her members, and by allowing the said members, Defendant C, and D to enter into a contract for delegation of a lawsuit. (2) According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, Defendant B received his/her personal information without the consent of E, H, I, and F.

Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted Defendant B of violating the Personal Information Protection Act on a different premise, either by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

3) The J is a person who comprehensively has the authority to access resident registration data by accessing the resident registration computer system. Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted Defendant B of violating the Resident Registration Act among the facts charged against Defendant B on the premise that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, or by misapprehending the eligibility to use and utilize the said data. B) The lower court acquitted Defendant B of the violation of the Resident Registration Act. The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant B (a fine of KRW 7 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below held that there was a mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles regarding the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act. The following circumstances acknowledged by the record, namely, ① the explanation that Defendant A and B had been made to U members, and the above Defendants delivered Defendant C and D’s legal knowledge and opinion as U president and executive secretary.