The judgment below

The part not guilty against Defendant A and the part on Defendant B shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The act of reproducing and transmitting a file stored in a smartphone using “blus function”, which is a base radio technology for exchanging information between electronic devices using the acquitted portion of Defendant A and Defendant B (Deficial misunderstanding)’s radio frequency, constitutes an act of infringing information and communications networks.

In addition, taking into account the circumstances such as the victim's statement that only allowed access to the details of his/her smartphones and allowing reproduction and transmission of personal files in his/her smartphones, the Defendants' intention is also recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on this part of the ancillary charges against the Defendants. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion

B. The guilty portion against Defendant A and the punishment of the lower court against the Defendants C (Indubingly unfair) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. The part not guilty against Defendant A and the judgment on Defendant B

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor examined the facts charged in the judgment below as follows: (a) by changing "the violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection," which is the ancillary facts charged in the judgment below, to the primary facts charged; and (b) by preserving the name of the crime in preliminary charge, "location of the content of electronic documents, etc.", "Article

(1) As stated in Paragraph (1), an application for changes in the Bill of Indictment was filed, and this Court permitted the amendment and added to the subject of the judgment, so the judgment of the court below rendered that the part not guilty of the defendant A and the part concerning the defendant B cannot be maintained any more.

However, the prosecutor's argument of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles on the changed primary facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and the following is the primary part of the prosecutor.