The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

seized evidence 7.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since Article 97 Subparag. 7 of the Telecommunications Business Act punishs a telecommunications business operator to provide telecommunications services provided by a telecommunications business operator for the purpose of communications of others, the elements of a crime, such as the date and time, place, method of crime, and recipient, should be specified in order to institute a prosecution on the ground of the violation of the aforementioned provision.

However, since the facts charged as to the violation of the Telecommunications Business Act against the defendant are not specified, the prosecution procedure constitutes a violation of the Act and becomes null and void, and thus, this part of the indictment should be dismissed.

B) Although the Defendant leased the name from G and L to establish a corporation, there is no fact that the Defendant opened a corporation by telephone in the name of the said corporation, and there is no fact that the Defendant provided others with the name of the said corporation.

(b) The sentencing division by prosecutor (in original instance: Imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, confiscation, and return);

2. Judgment on the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles by the defendant

A. No person who has a summary of this part of the facts charged may provide telecommunications services provided by a telecommunications business operator for any other person’s communications;

Nevertheless, around July 19, 2018, the Defendant opened three-time Internet telephone (I, J, K) in the name of H, a corporation established by the Defendant with the name lent from G, and one-time Internet telephone (N) in the name of M, a corporation established with the name lent from L, respectively, in the name of Gangdong-gu Seoul, Gangdong-gu Seoul, and around that time, provided the nameless winners for their communications.

B. Whether the facts charged are unspecified (negative) since the facts charged in the indictment No. 1 is required to limit the scope of the trial to the court and facilitate the exercise of the defense right by specifying the scope of the defense of the defendant.