All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning for Defendant A’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court was justifiable to have found Defendant A guilty of violating the Personal Information Protection Act by using beyond the scope of the purpose of collecting personal information, among the facts charged against Defendant A, for the reasons indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “use

Meanwhile, the ground of appeal to the effect that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to Article 15 (1) 5 and Article 17 (1) 2 of the Personal Information Protection Act, is not a legitimate ground of appeal, since the above defendant's grounds of appeal or the court below's decision did not consider it as being subject to judgment ex officio.

B. In addition, the lower judgment did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. Review of the record on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal reveals that Defendant B appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and only asserted the illegality of sentencing on the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant C and D’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s finding Defendant C and D guilty of the facts charged on the grounds indicated in its reasoning is justifiable, and there is no error of law by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on defense and accomplice (Article 112 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act).

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