Article 24 of Financial Convictions Enforcement Law, approved in 2015, has enumerated the minimum requirements for the continuation of an ordinary life, such as "the debtor's required telephone," in the form of debt exceptions and exempts it from seizure. The way of inserting the phrase "Required Phone" in aforementioned law is such that in practice has caused challenges during the enforcement of the sentences. The main question of the current research is the necessary circumstances for identifying a phone as an exception to debt, and the conditions of its seizure. Using a library method and a descriptive and analytical approach this study reaches the answer that the example of " required phone " includes its belongings too and the primary criterion for identifying the need and the dignity of the condemned person will be the reasonable criterion and in special cases, personal criteria can also be taken into account. Also, if the phone is needed by the condemned person and is in his dignity, or if it is a business tool and furniture needed for his life, then it is supported under debt exceptions. In cases of luxury and unreasonableness of the phone and its accessories, multiplicity of sim cards of the condemned person, whether it is a loan, having an obligation to return the phone, or introducing the phone by condemned person, seizure becomes possible.