The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the original court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant: (a) placed an advertisement on the purport that he purchases a mobile phone core chip opened under another’s name (hereinafter “large chip”) from multiple wholesalers at low prices and sells it on the site of an entertainment establishment; and (b) reported this fact to those who have contacted closely via the Internet Messen including “Kakaox” or “comgram”, and sold it to those who have contacted closely through the Internet Messen, thereby repeating a crime in violation of the Telecommunications Business Act for profit-making purposes.

When using the so-called "largephone chip" opened through the use of the "large-type chip" sold by the Defendant, the user can easily conceal his/her personal information in the transactional relationship, and thereby, the "large-type chip" is abused as the core tool for various crimes that may cause any significant social harm and injury as well as in the operation of illegal game places, commercial sex acts, or entertainment establishments.

In fact, among the persons who want to purchase "Spochips" from the Defendant, they seems to have been included in the scope of illegal sex trafficking business operators, illegal private transport business operators to commit Boposing fraud, and Internet drug sales.

Although the Defendant’s period of crime was about 17 days and the facts charged were about 18 times in total, it may be said that the “large chip” provided was totaling 26 crimes, the size of the crime revealed as 26.

However, even if the defendant's act promotes or facilitates the occurrence of other serious crimes, the illegality and possibility of criticism are not small in that the defendant did to commit the crime in accordance with the principle of one's own interest with the knowledge of such fact.

In particular, the Defendant violated the Electronic Financial Transactions Act by transferring the deposit account under another person's name in the past.