All of the public prosecutions against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) from March 11, 2013 to July 2013, the Defendants operated the Internet site called “F” in the name of “F” (H) from the point of view that the Defendants, from the point of view of around March 11, 2013 to the point of view of: (b) on the same page as members subscription and monthly automatic settlement screen; and (c) on the same page, the Defendants actually entered the certification number necessary for small-amount settlement for the monthly automatic settlement; (d) however, the Defendants failed to recognize the fact of automatic settlement by misleading the victims as if they entered the member subscription number; and (e) even if the Defendants knew of the fact of settlement and attempted to cancel it, they expressed deceptive indications that are likely to undermine the fair trade order by deceiving consumers or mislead consumers.

2. One copy of the indictment in this case, since Article 71 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act is applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 16(3) of the same Act to a crime falling under Article 17 subparag. 1 and Article 3(1)2 of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising, the indictment in this case can be instituted only when the Fair Trade Commission files a criminal charge. Thus, there is no evidence to prove that the indictment in this case was filed by the Fair Trade Commission, and the indictment in this case constitutes a case where the indictment in this case is null and void in violation of the provisions of the Act

3. Therefore, all of the public prosecutions against the Defendants are dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.