Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

No one may intermediate a third party's communications using telecommunications services provided by a telecommunications business operator or provide such services for a third party's communications.

Nevertheless, around July 5, 2017, the Defendant: (a) called “C to have the USIM chips linked to D circuits reissued to deliver it to Kwikset service articles”; (b) around September 16, 2017, the Defendant sent Kwikset service articles in Sung-gu, Sung-gu, Sungnam-si one copy of G chips to Kwikset service articles, and (c) provided the said USIM chips to B, and received KRW 200,000.

Accordingly, the defendant provided telecommunications services provided by telecommunications business operators for the use of others.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol concerning B;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Text details;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (H telephone communications);

1. Article 97 of the relevant Act on Criminal Facts and Articles 97 and 30 of the Telecommunications Business Act on the Selection of Punishment, and Selection of Fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the defendant's age, occupation, character and conduct, family relationship, and circumstances before and after the crime, under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, of the provisional payment order, shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the following circumstances:

It is necessary to strictly cope with another person's communication using telecommunications services as a means of other crimes. In this case, the fact that the core chips provided by the defendant were abused for the scaming crime, the fact that the defendant has been punished two times due to the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act, which is a similar crime, and that there is no criminal power over the suspension of execution, and that there is no criminal power over the suspension of execution.