Defendant

Prosecutor

Kim Jae-ho

Law Firm White, Attorney Kim Jae-chul

Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2007Gohap351 Decided January 15, 2008

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted by 50,000 won into one day.

The provisional payment of the amount equivalent to the above fine shall be ordered.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The defendant's act of sending the character to the Internet portal site, the Internet portal site, a statistics collection system, etc. using a single-name "commercial registration program" developed by the non-indicted 2 corporation, the representative director of which is the defendant, constitutes a crime of interference with the business of computer, etc., but the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, thereby finding the defendant not guilty.

2. Determination

ex officio, the prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment concerning interference with business with computers, etc. as stated below, and this court permitted changes in the indictment to the indictment concerning interference with business with the use of computers, etc. as stated below, and this court found the defendant guilty of interference with business with the use of computers, etc. among selective facts charged. As examined below, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

The defendant is the representative director of the non-indicted 2 corporation that provides advertising agency services. At around August 2005, the second floor of the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government ○○○ Venture Business Office 2 corporation's office (number omitted) through the site (site address omitted) operated by the above corporation, the "NHN" (www.naver.com) and "W.D.com" managed by the next communication corporation's office, and "W.D.com", which are managed by the following communication, are operated by the Internet portal site's office in the order of search and engine superior registration service (including registered website and other registered website) to provide users with an access to the first page of the search result, and then, the Internet server's office's address is accessible to the computer server's office's order of search and inspection by no later than March 2006.

1. 2005년 12월경 사실은 이용자들이 △△△( 홈페이지 주소생략) 및 ▲▲▲( 홈페이지 주소생략) 업체 홈페이지를 그 각 검색어인 수입보세 및 니뽄스타일로 검색하고 그 검색결과에서 위 각 업체의 홈페이지 링크를 클릭하여 해당 홈페이지를 방문한 사실이 없음에도 불구하고, 상위등록 프로그램을 이용하여 마치 이용자들이 위 검색어로 검색하여 위 △△△ 및 ▲▲▲ 홈페이지 링크를 클릭한 것처럼 네이버의 통계집계시스템( 사이트 주소 생략)에 허위의 쿼리를 일정 시차를 두고 주기적으로 보내어 네이버 서버시스템으로 하여금 이용자가 각 26,866회 및 14,177회에 걸쳐 각 홈페이지를 방문한 것처럼 통계자료를 잘못 인식하도록 하여 검색순위를 상승시키게 하는 방법으로, △△△ 홈페이지의 경우 2005. 12. 4. 평균 7.6위에 머물던 검색순위가 2005. 12. 8. 평균 3.1위로 상승하고, ▲▲▲ 홈페이지의 경우 2005. 12. 4. 평균 5.4위에 머물던 검색순위가 2005. 12. 8. 평균 3.0위로 상승하도록 검색순위를 조작한 것을 비롯하여, 2005년 8월경부터 2006년 3월경까지 사이에 위와 같은 방법으로 총 14,725,538회의 허위 클릭정보를 전송하여 ●●●( 홈페이지 주소생략), ▽▽▽( 홈페이지 주소생략), ▼▼▼( 홈페이지 주소생략), □□□( 홈페이지 주소생략), ■■■( 홈페이지 주소생략), ◎◎◎( 홈페이지 주소생략), ♡♡♡( 홈페이지 주소생략) 등 750개 업체들의 홈페이지 검색순위를 조작함으로써 컴퓨터 등 정보처리장치에 허위의 정보 또는 부정한 명령을 입력하거나 기타의 방법으로 정보처리에 장애를 발생하게 하여 이용자들의 검색 및 접속 회수 등에 따라 ‘사이트’란의 검색순위를 표시하고자 하는 주식회사 엔에이치엔의 검색서비스 제공업무를 방해하고,

2. On the above date, at the above place, transmission of false character information 1,605,535 times in total and at the same time, thereby manipulating the search order in the “site” column of the following communications, thereby hindering the provision of search services by the following communications companies by inputting false information or improper orders into information processing devices, or by causing interference with information processing by other means, such as computers.

1. The defendant's partial statement in the second trial records of the court below;

1. Each statement made by the witness Nonindicted 1 and 3 in the fourth and fifth trial records;

1. Each statement made by the witness Nonindicted 4 and 5 in the trial records of the court below 6 and 7th trial records

1. Each statement in the police statement made against Nonindicted 6 and 7

1. Seizure record and list;

1. Investigation report (for the above-registered registration data, sales status, etc.), program analysis report, announcement notice, access method through integrated search, the case of Nonindicted Party 2, the case of companies practically subordinate through integrated search, the arrangement of ranking manipulation s.m., the records of Nonindicted Party 2's illegal transmission - the criteria, date, classification and analysis data by site, the log recording for the four sites around August 2005, the log recording for the four sites around August 1, 2005, the log recording from December 1, 2005 to December 8, 2005, the log recording, the analysis data on the proportion of false character among the total water, the analysis data on the occurrence and cycle of false character, and the operation order list of sites around December 2, 2005.

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 314(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Fine)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Facts of recognition;

위 각 증거에 의하면, ① 네이버의 ‘비즈사이트’란은 클릭 횟수당 광고비로 노출 순위가 결정되고 그에 따른 광고비를 계속 지급하는 조건으로 검색 가능한 ‘광고’ 영역인 반면, ‘사이트’란은 이 사건 범행 당시 카테고리 1개당 198,000원의 등록심사비(그 후 2007. 9. 6.경 폐지되었다)를 지불하고 등록된 이후에는 광고비 등을 추가로 지급하지 아니한 채 검색 가능한 ‘비(비)광고’ 영역인 사실, ② 네이버의 ‘사이트’란 내 검색순위는 유사도(검색어와의 부합 정도) 및 인기도(클릭점수와 기타점수의 합) 등을 배합하여 결정되는데, 여성의류·꽃배달 등 상업성키워드의 경우 기타 점수에 큰 차이가 없는 사실, ③ 그리하여 네이버는 ‘사이트’란에 등록된 각 홈페이지 링크에 대한 클릭 수를 집계하고자 통계집계시스템( 사이트 주소 생략)을 운영하고 있고, 다음의 ‘사이트’란도 네이버의 ‘사이트’란과 유사한 방식으로 운영되는 사실, ④ 한편 피고인은 2005년 8월경부터 2006년 3월경까지 이 사건 상위등록 프로그램을 이용하여 실제로는 이용자들이 네이버 및 다음의 검색기능을 통해서 ‘사이트’란 내에 있는 △△△, ▲▲▲ 등 약 750개 업체들의 홈페이지 링크를 클릭하지 아니하였음에도 이를 클릭한 것처럼 통계집계시스템을 비롯한 위 포털사이트의 서버에 허위의 쿼리(query, 데이터베이스의 검색 또는 갱신시 발생하는 질문 또는 문의를 기술하는 데이터 조작언어)를 1분당 2회 내지 4회씩 주기적으로 보낸 사실, ⑤ 피고인이 2005. 12. 1.경부터 같은 달 8.경까지 상위등록 서비스를 제공한 업체들의 홈페이지 링크에 대한 전체 클릭 수 중 피고인이 보낸 클릭 수의 비율은 네이버 기준으로 △△△의 경우 약 88.1%, ▲▲▲의 경우 약 95.2%에 이르는 등 최소 약 78%에 이르렀고, △△△과 ▲▲▲ 등 일부 업체들의 네이버 내 ‘사이트’란 검색순위가 그 무렵 판시 범죄사실과 같이 상승한 사실 등을 인정할 수 있다.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the defendant's act of sending a false quota to NVV and the following statistical data collection system server as if he did not have character a link to the homepage using the above upper level registration program of this case constitutes an act of inputting a false information, which is an objective contrary to the truth, or an act of inputting an order, which differs from or is not originally anticipated from the original operational purpose of the statistical data collection system operated by the above portal site, etc.

In addition, even if any impediment has not occurred to the processing speed of the above portal site server due to the above false quotas sent by the defendant, if the data processing unit, such as the statistics collection system, etc., failed to function in accordance with the purpose of use or failed to function differently from the purpose of use, and thereby interfered with the provision of each search service by the following communication, as long as it is likely to affect the figures and search order of the web site, it shall be deemed that the provision of search service by the Internet and the following communication shall be interfered with.

Therefore, the defendant's act of sending a false quota to the statistics collection system as if he did not actually have a link on the website, and causing the misunderstanding of the statistics collection system as if he actually had a character, constitutes a crime of interference with the business of interference with computer, etc.

B. As to this, the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that, in order for the Defendant to be deemed to have practically obstructed data processing on the NAV and the next server, the above act would result in a change in the search order in the “site” of the portal site. However, the Defendant’s above act did not affect the NAV or the following “site” and did not have any actual influence on the search order, and thus, it does not constitute an obstacle to data processing.

According to each of the above evidence, as long as the defendant sent a false quota as if he was a character on the website, the following site "site" can be sufficiently recognized. The search order with NVand the following site "site" is determined by mixing similar degrees (the degree of conformity with the search order) and personality points (the combination of character points and other points). The similarity degree and other points between the company's website sharing the public commercial key, such as this case, are relatively large, and eventually, the number of character is recognized to have a considerable impact on the determination of search order. Thus, as long as the statistics collection system after the defendant sent is reflected in the statistics about the character because it was actually done, even if there was no change in the actual search order, it is reasonable to view that there was a problem of interference with the duty of information processing, and that there was no problem of interference with the duty of the defendant and the defense counsel, as a result of the above act of interference with the duty of the defense counsel, not the actual interference with the duty of information processing of the defendant, and there was no problem of interference with the duty of the defense counsel.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument of the defendant and the defense counsel.

As alleged by the Defendant, even though the instant upper-tier registration program did not cause any particular damage to the operating company of the portal site, including the U.N., the instant crime is not limited to obstructing the provision of search services by the above portal site operating company, but may actually impair the trust of its users. The fact that the Defendant appears to have acquired a considerable amount of profit through the instant crime appears to have obtained through the instant crime, and other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant argument, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, shall be determined by taking account of the various sentencing factors indicated in the instant

Judges Lee Jong-ho (Presiding Judge)