The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

The sentence against B shall be 300,000 won.

Defendant

B. A fine.

1. On the ground of appeal, Defendant B was found not guilty of the facts charged against the Defendants on the ground that Defendant B was not a personal information manager under the Personal Information Protection Act, even though it is obvious that Defendant B was the head of the apartment management office, by misapprehending the legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the Supreme Court's judgment on the grounds of appeal against the defendant B by the prosecutor is that the "person who manages or processed the personal information" under Article 59 subparagraph 2, who is the subject of Article 71 subparagraph 5 of the Personal Information Protection Act, is not limited to the "personal information manager" under Article 2 subparagraph 5, that is, the public institution, corporation, organization, or individual who processes the personal information directly or through another person to operate the personal information file for the purpose of his/her duties, and that the "personal information manager" under Article 2 subparagraph 1, which he/she has become aware of in the course of his/her duties, should be deemed to include the "management" or "management" under Article

According to the evidence duly admitted and duly admitted, the fact that Defendant B disclosed personal information he/she became aware of in the course of performing his/her duties as stated in the facts charged is sufficiently recognized.

Defendant

The judgment of the court below which acquitted Defendant B of the facts charged on the ground that Defendant B does not constitute a personal information manager is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

Furthermore, Article 6 of the Personal Information Protection Act provides that "Except as otherwise expressly provided for in other Acts, this Act shall apply to the protection of personal information," and in light of the purpose of special protection of personal information, the disclosure of personal information without consent of the subject of information, such as management rules, shall not be deemed a lawful inspection

B. The Prosecutor’s grounds for appeal against the Defendant A by the Prosecutor are relevant to the grounds for appeal.