2018Do2049 Violation of the Act on the Structural Improvement of Mobile Device Distribution Structure

1. A;

2. B

C

4. Scom Telecom Inc.

5. Cases involving a stock company;

6. El branchus Co., Ltd.;

Prosecutor (In respect of Defendants)

Law Firm (LLC) H (For defendant B and corporation, LLC)

Attorney J, I, Q, BI

Attorney BR, L, M, and BO (Defendant C, ELPus Co., Ltd.)

(n)

Seoul Central District Court Decision 20165032 Decided January 19, 2018

September 13, 2018

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The lower court: (a) based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the Defendants were from October 31, 2014 to November 2, 2014.

Until now, it is not sufficient to recognize that the payment of a bounty to an agency through the sales incentive policy constitutes an act of inducing an agency which is prohibited by Article 9 (3) of the Mobile Device Distribution Improvement Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") to provide an unreasonably discriminative subsidy to users, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and thus, the changed facts charged in this case were acquitted.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “act of inducing” under Article 9(3) of the Act, contrary to what is alleged in the

2. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jo Hee-de

Justices Kim Jae-in

Justices Min You-sook of the District Court

Justices Lee Jae-hwan