logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.11.21 2019고정1258
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(정보통신망침해등)
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, it shall be 100.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Basic Facts] Defendant A is a company that operates online advertising agency business with the trade name of Defendant B, and Defendant B is a company that operates advertising agency business with the location of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C and D.

Defendant

A made Internet users to ask questions about the reputation of the advertiser, such as hospital, at the Mah Mabl Mam Scerh's Internet portal site "E", and registered the contents of online users in the form of experience, such as post-marks or recommendations on specific services or goods requested in advance by the relevant advertiser, and made a false representation as if he/she actually experienced, and made an advertisement by inducing any person who may know it to purchase advertising services or goods.

Accordingly, Defendant A purchased an account under the name of another person from around September 2015 to September 2018 from a person whose name cannot be known.

However, the accounts purchased by Defendant A are distributed to bruth marketing companies and used to prepare advertising letters on the contents (knowledges, carpets, and blogs) provided on the E site, and their use is prohibited in accordance with the E’s “E”-based policy, which is in violation of the terms and conditions of use, and is an illegal account for which approval for use of E, a service provider of information and communications network, cannot be obtained because it is used for a cloak program that circumvents A, or posts automatically large quantities of letters. Therefore, the above account was not authorized to access E by using it.

【Criminal Facts】

1. No defendant A shall intrude into an information and communications network without access authority or beyond the permitted access authority;

Nevertheless, from March 22, 2018 to June 15, 2018, the Defendant had employees, such as F, in the B office of the Co., Ltd., F, etc. receive legitimate access authority from E. 83 accounts, such as ID, etc.

arrow