All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) The prosecutor prosecuted the Defendants on the grounds that they violated Article 24 of the Act on Promotion of Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”). Thus, the lower court determined that the Defendants violated Article 22(1) of the Information and Communications Network Act by using the Defendants in violation of the duty of destruction under Article 29(1) of the Act, even though the period for possession and use of personal information for which the Defendants obtained consent under Article 22(1) of the Information and Communications Network Act had lapsed but the Defendants violated the duty of destruction under Article 24 of the Act. The lower court determined that the Defendants violated Article 24 of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, etc. of Information and Communications Network Act by misapprehending the legal doctrine on Article 24 of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, etc. (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”). The Defendants’ act of using personal information at the time when the Defendants violated the duty of destruction was not subject to criminal punishment.

2) In light of the language and text of “services” as indicated in the written consent received from the users at the time of applying for the purchase of a prepaidphone, and the meaning of “services” used in light of the overall contents of the purpose indicated in the written consent and general transaction terms at the time of the application for the purchase of a prepaidphone, the amount of the charge for restitution shall be deemed to be included in the written agreement for the use of the prepaidphone, and even if the amount of the charge for restitution is not included in the essential content of the written consent for the use of the prepaidphone, it shall be deemed that it is included in the content of the pre-paid agreement.

Even if it is at least a new subscription act or advertisement, it is a marketing.