The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A and B shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months, and by imprisonment for one year, respectively.

except that this shall not apply.

1. Grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles (Defendant C), the defendant A does not constitute a third party under Article 17(1) and Article 71 subparag. 1 of the Personal Information Protection Act in relation to the agreement call business, and thus, it is unreasonable to punish the defendant's act of providing personal information to him as a violation of the above provision.

B. The lower court’s sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor and confiscation; imprisonment with prison labor for one year; three years of suspended execution; community service work hours; Defendant C: imprisonment with prison labor for one year; two years of imprisonment with prison labor and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Before determining the grounds for appeal ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the prosecutor ex officio examined the Defendants’ violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. among the names of the Defendants’ crimes, as “violation of Personal Information Protection Act”, and “Article 71 subparag. 1 and Article 22(1) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc.” under Articles 71 subparag. 1 and 17(1)2 of the Personal Information Protection Act as “Article 71 subparag. 1 and Article 17(1) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc.” under the applicable provisions

On the other hand, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, Defendant C's assertion of legal principles is still subject to a trial by the party.

B. Article 71 subparag. 1 of the Personal Information Protection Act provides a third party with personal information without the consent of a subject of information in violation of Article 17(1)2 of the same Act. Here, the third party shall be deemed to include both a personal information manager and a person other than a subject of information, and the above provision shall prevent reckless spread of personal information itself.